Adobe Tests Doubling the Price of Photography Plan With Photoshop and Lightroom

[Flight Plan]

Shaka, when the subscription fell.

Well played!

The comments are going to be filled with a lot of upset users.

Photographer: Doesn't blink at spending $1500-5000 on a new lens, or $3000-5000 on a new camera body, or $300-800 on a new tripod, or $400-900 on a new flash, or $150 a pop on new UHS-II SD cards, or $800-3000 on a Thunderbolt RAID setup and SSDs, or $3000-7000 on a new Mac, or $800-2000 on a second and third display, or thousands of dollars on lighting equipment and backdrops and travel and paying models and grips.

Also photographer: Freaks out at having to pay Adobe a couple hundred bucks a year to edit, organize, share, and store all of their photos.

Y'all suck.

Thank you for the insult, but your premise just doesn't apply.

Yeah, I guess it sucks for regular users who just do it as a hobby. But for real photographers it's a drop in the bucket. I bet what happened is their cloud costs have dropped and their regular development costs have increased with inflation so they are wanting to increase the price and are hoping to see this as a way to do it without seeming like it.

"Real photographers?" I suggest that all photographers are "real".

I think Adobe CC subscribers went a long way in helping create the world they are currently in by simply subscribing.

I agree, that's actually how capitalism works.

No. It’s time to test out alternative apps like the excellent Affinity Designer, Affinity Photo, Pixelmator Pro, etc. The best way to break the stranglehold Adobe has you in is to slip free of it—NOT to run off and compromise the security of your system by downloading questionable software.

Agreed.

Capitalism at its finest right here. “We can piss off and lose half of our subscribers, if we DOUBLE the price. More profits, shareholders will love us, and we have fewer people to keep happy!” This subscription model will continue until it’s run right into the ground—they all know that it’s not sustainable at this pace. Yet they will do it anyway, because they exist to please only shareholders.

Your premise about capitalism is all wrong here. When you chase away your customers for a long time, you will have your "come to capitalism" moment. And then you'll either change your evil ways or you'll go out of business.

What is the LR alternative people are using? I was with Affinity for about two years. I finally got tired of waiting for Affinity to make DAM and had to move back to the creative cloud. I am not a pro, but I tend to edit my photos more when I use LR.

Aftershot Pro, by Corel.

We've used Illustrator and Photoshop since the 1990's. When they went to subscriptions, it was difficult to get our entire department updated, due to older computers and operating systems. Some machines stayed with CS6 as long as possible before transitioning to CC.

I miss being able to own the software, even with paid upgrades.

If $19.99/month sounds greedy, try $550/month for a small in-house art department!

The more you use the software, the more advantages you can find, no doubt. Mobile apps are included, some have free professional brushes. You can use all Adobe apps, not just 1 or 2.

But, that's a large monthly fee to justify to a CFO!

Younger designers find Adobe to be corporate, compared to Procreate that fits their lifestyle in a more dynamic way. At this moment, Adobe still is #1 in the marketplace by far. But, if Procreate is a one-time purchase, and you can draw your ass off on a cool iPad Pro, I think a lot of new designers will find that to be a good fit for them.

Hmmm, I guess the long-term question would be, what do they teach at the college level? Is it all Adobe Illustrator and Photoshop? Or, do they sprinkle in Procreate and Affinity. If young students are brought up on Procreate, and work in that platform for a few years, they're not going to want to re-learn their workflow on Adobe products later on.

That would be the biggest risk for Adobe, that, a new generation isn't stuck with their platform. Once they're 25-30, Adobe has lost most of them for good.

After learning Photoshop and Illustrator, I didn't want to have to re-learn everything in Corel Draw.

Colleges teach Adobe. Adobe subsidizes this because they know that the next generation of users will come from colleges.

These are PROFESSIONAL TOOLS and should cost as such. I never hear people complaining that a good table saw is $900+ or a decent camera can be over $3000. Anyone who is complaining was probably pirating Photoshop to begin with and I have zero sympathy. Affinity Photo is $50 and its fantastic.

Oh puhlease spare us with your "professional tools" rant. Price IS a limiting factor for a lot of people.

They don't care about the shareholders.

Much like communism, shareholders are a red herring. When was the last time shareholders were able to whack the C level executives or the board members.

This is all about the stock price - and the executive compensation that is tied to it.

Stock price does not keep a company in business forever. Fact.

If you’re a professional photographer and make your living out of it by earning $2000 a month for example. $20 is just a 1% of your earning that is also tax deductible. 1%...

Most of us are NOT professional photographers. Way to assume who your audience is.

My guess is that they have done their homework and they have done the math. By doubling the price, they know that some folks will cancel, but let's say 25% of users cancel their subs, Adobe has still increased revenues substantially.

And that's the thing --> the total cancelations will be far less than 25% of users. There are professionals that have businesses built around these tools and workflows where switching to different software will be way more expensive than just ponying up the extra monthly fees.

As has been the case since subscriptions became the norm, it's the casual users that get screwed. I would like Photoshop on my machine so that I can use it a few times a year, but I'm not paying a monthly fee for anything that I don't use daily. At least there are decent and affordable, quality alternatives now.

Yes to everything you said. You're on the money here.

 

[Baymowe335]

Armchair CEOs checking in, per usual.

 

[jtrauscht]

In all likelihood, this is a test to raise the overall CC pricing. If it’s just Photography, there is decent competition, but not for the whole suite.

 

[warp9]

You used to be able to buy Photoshop, and use it for several years. If you only upgraded every second or third cycle, it was cheaper than the $9.99/month subscription.

This is not true. The old price of Photoshop CS Standard was $699. Annual upgrades were $199. If you add the purchase price + two upgrades, it would cost $1,097.

It would take over 9 years to break even under the current CC subscription plan, and that doesn't even include Lightroom or storage. When that 9 years ends, you would have to pay another $199 for the next version (almost 2 years under the subscription model).

The bottom line is, subscriptions are not more expensive and are often cheaper than buying outright. It just feels more expensive because you see the charge every month.

 

[Icewarm]

I've been trying Affinity. Other than the differences in interface, it has been pretty easy to use.

 

[currahee2100]

EDIT: Looking at their Twitter account and the angry people tweeting at them, it looks like the 20GB $9.99/month will not be going away.

lol

 

[oldwatery]

Look at Affinity Photo on the App Store, I’ve used it professionally for 2 years now. It’s built/designed specifically for macOS.

I have used PS for over 25 years. Do you think I might be happy with Affinity because it looks rather interesting.

 

[w5jck]

Wasn’t the LR & PS combo price originally $20/month? I seem to recall it was. Then Adobe lowered the price to $10/month. I subscribed to it once it went down to $10/month. I’m retired and can manage that, but I really can’t afford twice that. There is NO alternative that actually works for me and my astrophotography hobby. I’ve tried several alternatives and none of them come close, so I hope Adobe keeps us grandfathered in at the $10/month rate.

BTW, several people have pointed to the recent announcement that support for Aperture was ending. Seriously, Aperture was a huge POS and in no way came close to PS or LR. No way there is any connection other than a vivid imagination by people who have no clue about these three apps.

 

[Wash08]

The comments are going to be filled with a lot of upset users.

Photographer: Doesn't blink at spending $1500-5000 on a new lens, or $3000-5000 on a new camera body, or $300-800 on a new tripod, or $400-900 on a new flash, or $150 a pop on new UHS-II SD cards, or $800-3000 on a Thunderbolt RAID setup and SSDs, or $3000-7000 on a new Mac, or $800-2000 on a second and third display, or thousands of dollars on lighting equipment and backdrops and travel and paying models and grips.

Also photographer: Freaks out at having to pay Adobe a couple hundred bucks a year to edit, organize, share, and store all of their photos.

Y'all suck.

yes photographer will expend the money on the equipment, but they will get the use of said equipment for years to come, is not like nikon or cannon are renting you the lens, Adobe subscription is extortion plain and simple, I was paying for $29 a month for cc then they hike it to $50 with a year that’s $600 a year after year…do you buy lenses year after year?

 

[Analog Kid]

I find the most offensive part of this that it's a test. They're just randomly changing the pricing for some people to see if they'll bite.

They really should have three tab:

Individuals, Students and Teachers, Suckers

 

[td2243]

I have used PS for over 25 years. Do you think I might be happy with Affinity because it looks rather interesting.

I'm no pro, but I love it. I do have graphic design professional friends that switched. $50 bucks for life!

 

[s15119]

Insane. I have NO interest in renting software. No.

 

[CE3]

Armchair CEOs checking in, per usual.

Glad you could join us!

 

[Peepo]

No.

Adobe CC's suffering from stagnation and bloat while being outrageously overpriced for the sluggish performance, especially in the face of competitors like Pixelmator and the Affinity apps, which don't require subscriptions at all.

Hell, Pixelmator Photo on the iPad is cheaper as a one-time purchase than the current monthly price of this photography package. It's outrageous.

Update: You can buy Pixelmator and Pixelmator Photo on iOS as one-time purchases for the same price as a month of this nonsense.

Yes but with one time purchase, especially in MAS, everyone expects lifetime upgrades. This is why Pixelmator Pro was created: to re-sell to everyone who bought Pixemlator.

I own Affinity Photo and Affinity Designer for macOS and iOS. I think they are amazing apps but wonder how long the current versions will be supported without any recurring revenue for development.

 

[lcseds]

Probably put it at $19.99 for a month or so, then offer a great limited time offer at $12.99. And new users get excited they scored a special. Then mission accomplished I suppose?

 

[jchap]

Bingo.

Scenario: Ferrari doubles the price of their cars.
User: “Damn, I really want that Ferrari driving experience, but I don’t want to pay. Guess I’ll steal one.”

How is piracy of software any different from theft? Just because you can, doesn't mean you should.

 

[Azeroth1]

Whoever invented the whole push to subscription models for everything, I fart in your general direction.

 

[Altis]

I own Affinity Photo and Affinity Designer for macOS and iOS. I think they are amazing apps but wonder how long the current versions will be supported without any recurring revenue for development.

That's a particularly big issue with iOS and their locked-down "ecosystem."

 

[Analog Kid]

This is not true. The old price of Photoshop CS Standard was $699. Annual upgrades were $199. If you add the purchase price + two upgrades, it would cost $1,097.

It would take over 9 years to break even under the current CC subscription plan, and that doesn't even include Lightroom or storage. When that 9 years ends, you would have to pay another $199 for the next version (almost 2 years under the subscription model).

The bottom line is, subscriptions are not more expensive and are often cheaper than buying outright. It just feels more expensive because you see the charge every month.

If this wasn't more profitable for Adobe, they wouldn't have done it. Just had a similar conversation in the Aperture thread and went to look at what continuous improvement all this subscription revenue is buying.

Here's the new feature list for CC2019:

• You can create a placeholder mask before putting an image in it.
• Content aware fill got moved to a new workspace.
• Cmd-Z for undo.
• Transformation reference point now defaults hidden rather than shown.
• Double-click to edit text.
• Commit text by clicking outside the box.
• Transformations now default to proportional for some objects.
• You can lock tool panels to prevent dragging.
• When you select a blend mode you can see a preview.
• If you use Photoshop to paint, you can mirror your brush strokes.
• Color wheel color selector
• New home screen lobby
• You can use your own images in the tutorials
• Distribute spacing of objects (like Adobe Illustrator)
• Math in number fields
• Hover to see the full layer name
• Match Font now supports Japanese
• You can flip the canvas horizontally
• Lorem Ipsum placeholder text
• Customize keyboard shortcuts for Select and Mask
• Preference to increase UI size
• Support for South East Asian scripts

I don't want to minimize the engineering effort required, but when "multiple undo" is on the highlights of a 2019 release, they're done. They're out of ideas, but still want you to pay like you're "upgrading".

 

[thomas040]

Of course they are. They have a monopoly. Why wouldn't they turn the thumbscrews up.

 

[jchap]

There’s a reason why I have been and will continue to pirate CS6. I’m not paying a monthly subscription for this ****, especially if they’re going to raise it at will.

That’s because you want the experience and the benefit of years of development and millions of dollars of investment and blood, sweat and tears, but you don't want to pay a dime for it.

How is this any different from theft?

 

[raccoontail]

Still on Photoshop CS6 and Sierra. I don't know what I will do because I know I will eventually need to upgrade.

It took a good hour of searching and command line work to get CS5 working on Mojave. Much better than a subscription, and for my needs none of the features in the last 10 years have seemed worth the cost of upgrading.

 

[Tpiorkowski]

I would look at Luminar from Skylum, it’s a great alternative to LR

 

[oldwatery]

Affinity users, what are you using as a photo manager?

 

[mannyvel]

I'm looking at affinity now, and it looks pretty OK.

I don't mind subscriptions, because developers have to eat. It's not realistic to expect updates forever for a one-time purchase anymore. Support alone is a huge cost. I've listened to support people walk new users through a step-by-step for hours. It's crazy.

The problem with Adobe's stuff is that it doesn't really seem to be improving a lot; they subscription fee is just rent at this point because it's not cost-effective to adjust your workflow.

The new world of software is you either pay a subscription or you pay for upgrades. BBEdit has been around forever because they are constantly improving it...and you have to pay for upgrades occasionally. I bought BBEdit decades ago, and they wouldn't be in business if I never had to pay them again.