Wye Photography

Wye Photography

Lives in Australia Australia
Joined on Feb 16, 2009

Comments

Total: 492, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Wye Photography: Apparently PS CC costs $9 per month. $9 a month may sound cheap but that is $108 per annum, $324 over three years, $540 over 5 years.

Affinity photo will cost you $50 to begin with, the $50 you have already paid after one year. The $50 you have already paid after three years and the $50 you have already paid after five years. $50 vs $540.

This software is BETA

It can only get BETTER.

If you want to pour money into Adobe's coffers...

The choice is yours.

@Arvin Chang part two

Sorry, Arvin, I didn't imply anything. I didn't factor in any upgrade cost for the same reason I didn't factor future increase in price, VAT, tax, the plummeting cost of oil etc. as these are "known unknowns" to quote the beloved Mr. Rumsfeld.

I simply did a quick price comparison based on today's figures. Sorry for any confusion.

I think some people are blinkered "photoshop, photoshop, photoshop". It's been photoshop for so long it's like the mind is already closed when something new comes along. Yes, there will be a little earning curve.

I do most of my work in Lightroom and only pop to photoshop only for those small edits you just can't do in LR, a tricky healing brush for example. Affinity Photo is a bargain and photoshop extremely expensive. Often, I go for MONTHS not even using photoshop and that makes the cost not even worth it.

Everyones needs will be different and it is YOUR money. Whatever makes YOU happy!

Direct link | Posted on Feb 13, 2015 at 09:23 UTC
In reply to:

Wye Photography: Apparently PS CC costs $9 per month. $9 a month may sound cheap but that is $108 per annum, $324 over three years, $540 over 5 years.

Affinity photo will cost you $50 to begin with, the $50 you have already paid after one year. The $50 you have already paid after three years and the $50 you have already paid after five years. $50 vs $540.

This software is BETA

It can only get BETTER.

If you want to pour money into Adobe's coffers...

The choice is yours.

@Arvin Chang

Apparently, upgrades for Affinity in the first two or three years is going to be free.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 13, 2015 at 09:03 UTC

Apparently PS CC costs $9 per month. $9 a month may sound cheap but that is $108 per annum, $324 over three years, $540 over 5 years.

Affinity photo will cost you $50 to begin with, the $50 you have already paid after one year. The $50 you have already paid after three years and the $50 you have already paid after five years. $50 vs $540.

This software is BETA

It can only get BETTER.

If you want to pour money into Adobe's coffers...

The choice is yours.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 12, 2015 at 18:04 UTC as 11th comment | 16 replies
In reply to:

ThrowFirewoodAtMe: This is just not that good. Sure it's "the next best thing", but it's nowhere near Photoshop or Lightroom, which are now a giveaway at $9 or so a month.

$9 a month may sound cheap but that is $108 per annum, $324 over three years, $540 over 5 years.

Affinity photo will cost you $50 to begin with, the $50 you have already paid after one year. The $50 you have already paid after three years and the $50 you have already paid after five years. $50 vs $540.

This software is BETA

It can only get BETTER.

The choice is yours.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 12, 2015 at 18:00 UTC
In reply to:

Michel Cojan: tried it today... frankly, not impressed... All right, it's still in beta version, but tried a "simple" thing like opening a short series of 10-12 RAW images (things I do regularly in Photoshop or Light-Room with dozens, even hundreds of RAW images at a time), whole thing jammed on me and jammed the whole system. Restarted my Mac (hard reset), than tried again with same result. For now, forget about it.

@toni2

Drawbacks! What a laugh!

Two words.

VISTA (Hahahahahahahaha)

Win8 (Hahahahahahahaha)

Both are incompetent piles of Poo. Even my Windows loving friends hate Win8.

Unless you use Linux you are a very sad man. I hope you wake up from your buggy, crashy, insecure, virus and trojan ridden bloatware wet dream soon.

But, hey, if peeps are happy using it. Fine.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 12, 2015 at 12:43 UTC
On Hands-on with Canon's 'not-coming-to-USA' EOS M3 article (553 comments in total)

Hey Damien, I think you should do something about the colour of your nail varnish, but at least it matches the camera!

Direct link | Posted on Feb 11, 2015 at 18:44 UTC as 21st comment | 1 reply

If it was 2010 I would say YES!

But its 2015 so its a NO!

I think its a case of too little way too late. Good luck to it though because I really like the design (yeah! shallow I know). I recently dumped my big bulky DSLR for a NX200. I haven't looked back.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 11, 2015 at 17:54 UTC as 198th comment
In reply to:

Michel Cojan: tried it today... frankly, not impressed... All right, it's still in beta version, but tried a "simple" thing like opening a short series of 10-12 RAW images (things I do regularly in Photoshop or Light-Room with dozens, even hundreds of RAW images at a time), whole thing jammed on me and jammed the whole system. Restarted my Mac (hard reset), than tried again with same result. For now, forget about it.

@Michel Cojan

Hear! Hear!

Direct link | Posted on Feb 11, 2015 at 17:47 UTC
In reply to:

forpetessake: "cheaper than Photoshop," -- misplaced concern, Photoshop is already cheap enough so users care more about functionality than about price.

"comes with the added benefit of silky-smooth operation, at least according to its maker" -- solving the problem that doesn't exist? Photoshop is silky smooth, whatever it means.

"because it is newly created for the latest hardware, Serif says Affinity Photo offers performance that Photoshop struggles to match" -- very dubious claim, it's actually a red flag when companies choose such language.

In other words, they want to compete with Adobe but couldn't come up with any serious points why customers would want to switch.

You're running Scared!

It's about time someone kicked the crown from Adobe's head and Serif just may do that.

I have already rid myself of Illustrator, Photoshop just may be the next to go.

I have only used this beta for a little while and so far I like it. Can't wait for the fully release.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 11, 2015 at 11:27 UTC
In reply to:

Michel Cojan: tried it today... frankly, not impressed... All right, it's still in beta version, but tried a "simple" thing like opening a short series of 10-12 RAW images (things I do regularly in Photoshop or Light-Room with dozens, even hundreds of RAW images at a time), whole thing jammed on me and jammed the whole system. Restarted my Mac (hard reset), than tried again with same result. For now, forget about it.

@ toni2

What Codswhallop! People who say the Mac thing is a myth are those who have never used them. Please carry on living in your fantasy land.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 11, 2015 at 11:22 UTC
In reply to:

srados: Company that excludes pc users is the same like what Canon that chose not to release their Eos-m3 to north America.

No, the company does NOT exclude PC users. Serif's foundation software is all PC based, it is very good too and a fraction of the price of Adobe software. The Mac software has been a long time coming.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 11, 2015 at 11:17 UTC
On Apple reveals Photos beta for developers post (125 comments in total)
In reply to:

martinsmac: Apple should have defined a product roadmap some time ago. A sudden announcement that they'd lost interest in the market was a poor way to behave.

Like others here, I'm finding C1 to be superb, and am moving away from Apple generally. My conclusion is they cant be trusted. Apple will chase the money with no regard for their users.

@mjbauer

At least "their crap equipment" doesn't run Windows 8 which is an unbelievably massive pile of Poo!

I just wonder when was the last time you used "their crap equipment"?

Direct link | Posted on Feb 9, 2015 at 15:42 UTC
On Apple reveals Photos beta for developers post (125 comments in total)
In reply to:

Wye Photography: Pity, I was hoping for an Aperture replacement and a direct challenger to Lightroom and Capture One. I rather liked some features of Aperture, C1 is OK, DXO clunky and Lightroom superb. That's a personal opine. LR works great for me.

I was hoping for Aperture X. I don't think any criticism of Apple is warranted. No matter how brilliant the new app may be they would be competing with two or three (depending on your opinion) other very well established, brilliant professional level apps.

I can understand why Apple has pulled out of this area. I would still like to have Aperture X or Photos X firmly aimed at the professional market though.

@DaveE1

Excellent point, and as you mentioned FCP X, the same also applies to Logic Pro X. Short term pain for long term gain.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 9, 2015 at 13:25 UTC
On Apple reveals Photos beta for developers post (125 comments in total)

Pity, I was hoping for an Aperture replacement and a direct challenger to Lightroom and Capture One. I rather liked some features of Aperture, C1 is OK, DXO clunky and Lightroom superb. That's a personal opine. LR works great for me.

I was hoping for Aperture X. I don't think any criticism of Apple is warranted. No matter how brilliant the new app may be they would be competing with two or three (depending on your opinion) other very well established, brilliant professional level apps.

I can understand why Apple has pulled out of this area. I would still like to have Aperture X or Photos X firmly aimed at the professional market though.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 9, 2015 at 11:43 UTC as 14th comment | 6 replies

I wonder how slow that lens will be at the telephoto end?

Direct link | Posted on Feb 6, 2015 at 14:58 UTC as 26th comment | 2 replies

Cynical me says this is a ploy to keep Canon users hanging on and looking elsewhere.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 6, 2015 at 11:47 UTC as 30th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

Helmut Eder: Well - for me the smaller size is more important than a viewfinder - I'm glad they went this way.

@ Arn

I also have to disagree (with the "any focal length" bit). I have a lovely little Samsung NX200. No finder, optical or electronic. No flash either. I don't find the lack of these a handicap at all.

Mind you, I don't think I would want to use the NX200 with anything longer than 200mm.

I did have the G1 X, for me it was an awful camera, a beefed-up not-so-good compact. I personally don't hold much hope for this one either. But, we'll see!

Cynical me says this is a ploy to keep Canon users hanging on instead of running to Panasonic, Sony, Olympus or Samsung.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 6, 2015 at 11:43 UTC

A slight naming error and we could have ended up with this camera being called OM-D EM-I5E that would have been a laugh.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 5, 2015 at 10:22 UTC as 37th comment

"Picking up where its successor left off, the E-M5 II continues to offer weather sealing and 5-axis IS while adding a redesigned 16MP Four Thirds sensor and 5-axis image stabilization".

"picking up from where its successor left off" - Don't you mean predecessor DPREVIEW.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 5, 2015 at 10:21 UTC as 38th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Rick_Hunter: KEN ROCKWELL USES THIS. (enough said)

@ Roger,

Not everyone here into fashion photography, selfies perhaps and are obviously just too good looking for this app to improve anything.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 4, 2015 at 15:40 UTC
Total: 492, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »