Q: Why do people still use Photoshop CS6 from 2013

Night Pixel

Senior Member
Messages
2,195
Solutions
3
Reaction score
2,223
Location
WITSEC
Why are folks using 10 year old software when there are modern cheaper alternatives actively supported today?

Does it even run on modern computers?

E.g.: Affinity Photo,, GIMP etc.
 
Solution
I use the $10/mo photography package and its been a game changer for me. The amount of workflow time saved with the more modern toolset means more time to go out and shoot.
That is great. Everyone should use what makes them happy.

THREAD HAS REACHED MAX - Thanks for all the great responses...

--
**** REDACTED ****
Why are folks using 10 year old software
I use 16-year-old Photoshop CS3 from 2007.
when there are modern cheaper alternatives actively supported today?
What's cheaper than zero? My employer paid the original cost, so I've paid nothing at all.
Does it even run on modern computers?
It runs very well, yes.
E.g.: Affinity Photo,, GIMP etc.
I also have those, but I use Photoshop far more frequently because I can do certain useful things very quickly with it. Maybe those other tools can also do some of them, but there's no incentive for me to stop using Photoshop.
 
Last edited:
I run CS5 on Windows 10 as well as Lightroom 6 on a computer I built in 2011. They still work fine. I also have Affinity
I understand you are running 10 year old software, but what I am interested in knowing is WHY?

Yes, they still work, but there have been many improvements and features added over 10 years. You feel no need for these? If you have Affinity, why use 10 year old PS?
 
Because, having bought them it costs no more and they are just right for my purposes, the newer ones, are not that inviting, to continue shelling out to Adobe.

I have Affinity because I want to support UK software, but truth be told, I know how to use Photoshop and even in the latest version Raw development seems bit of a chore and there is no database or proxies to speed up things. I would be interested if Serif came out with something along the lines Of Lightroom.
 
Last edited:
Why are folks using 10 year old software when there are modern cheaper alternatives actively supported today?

Does it even run on modern computers?

E.g.: Affinity Photo,, GIMP etc.
 
I have CS6 but can't use it because I only have 4k monitors and the font kludge is, well, horrible.

There are valid financial reasons for not tithing Adobe, but they seem kind of suspect when the user's gear list indicates a recent and substantial investment in gear whose potential is left untapped.
 
Why are folks using 10 year old software when there are modern cheaper alternatives actively supported today?

Does it even run on modern computers?

E.g.: Affinity Photo,, GIMP etc.
Why not ?
Software you know well is often the most productive.

I have PS 2024, Affinity Photo, Gimp and a few others here, but my first choice for pixel editing is PS CS4.
CS4 runs fast and reliably on W10
 
I understand you are running 10 year old software, but what I am interested in knowing is WHY?

Yes, they still work, but there have been many improvements and features added over 10 years. You feel no need for these? If you have Affinity, why use 10 year old PS?
Actually 11 years old, going on 12. Still runs fine on Windows 11, as does Illustrator CS 6, which I sometimes use alongside PS (that ship has sailed a looong time ago in Apple land). Not jumping on the CC bandwagon has saved me approx. 8000€. So yeah, cheap....

As to why: The answer depends on the use case. Professional freelance illustrator here, and as a painting tool CS6 is every bit as good as CC. In fact, nothing whatsoever has changed in terms of the brushes palette (let me extend that statement: Photoshop CC is in it´s core still the old Photoshop CS6, with a bunch of new features bolted to every nook and cranny).

For digital photography: I use RawTherapee as main RAW editor, and import the results into PS CS6 for further editing, sometimes going forth and back between both. RT can well be used as an image editing tool, and the feature set in some areas is superior to all else I know.

Affinity Photo is, despite al it´s strong points, a disappointment, unfortunately. The RAW editor is very basic, mildly put.

It´s perfectly possible I may subscribe to the photography plan in 2024. Super resolution and denoise AI are the very first features I´d consider worthwhile.
 
Affinity Photo is, despite al it´s strong points, a disappointment, unfortunately. The RAW editor is very basic, mildly put.

It´s perfectly possible I may subscribe to the photography plan in 2024. Super resolution and denoise AI are the very first features I´d consider worthwhile.
Agreed, Affinity is not really a good RAW editor, I use DxO PhotoLab 7.
 
Agreed, Affinity is not really a good RAW editor, I use DxO PhotoLab 7.
DxO is something I´m closely following as well, because of the best AI denoise and general image enhancement tool. I´m hoping they´ll come up with their own AI upscaling solution.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lan
I suspect those who do are happy campers who subscribe to the: if-it-aint-broke philosophy.

Having used various s/w tools in the past it always drove me nuts when the vendor "fixed" things that I never used and in doing so changed the GUI that I'd learned.

I still regularly use Paintshop Pro v. 5.1 despite the fact that there have been yearly updates (one of which I purchased and hated hence rolled back to the cd install of the v.5 which continues to install just fine on newer PC's).

I have however switched to AP v.2.3 for my photo editing (on a 10 year old laptop).

- Gary
 
Why are folks using 10 year old software when there are modern cheaper alternatives actively supported today?

Does it even run on modern computers?

E.g.: Affinity Photo,, GIMP etc.
Not me. When I got a new PC two years ago I went from CS6 to the cheapest Adobe subscription model. Loving it---the lens blur filter to me is a game changer!
 
Why are folks using 10 year old software when there are modern cheaper alternatives actively supported today?

Does it even run on modern computers?

E.g.: Affinity Photo,, GIMP etc.
I used it till my computer died two weeks ago. Tried Affinity years ago and never took to it. Now I’m using Affinity as my main software. At $39 it’s one heck of a deal. Will probably be purchasing DXO RAW after my trial expires.
 
I run CS5 on Windows 10 as well as Lightroom 6 on a computer I built in 2011. They still work fine. I also have Affinity
I understand you are running 10 year old software, but what I am interested in knowing is WHY?

Yes, they still work, but there have been many improvements and features added over 10 years. You feel no need for these? If you have Affinity, why use 10 year old PS?
I think you should think about what the word “need” means… people were quite happy with CS6 when it came out and it still works well today.
 
Why are folks using 10 year old software when there are modern cheaper alternatives actively supported today?
The two most common reasons are:

A. They do not need OS support or features newer than CS6, and they’re right. (They have basic editing needs, and maybe an old computer)

B. They think they do not need OS support or features newer than CS6, and they’re wrong.
 
B. They think they do not need OS support or features newer than CS6, and they’re wrong.
No, lots of us really don't need any of the new 'features'. Most owners never used any more than a small sub-set of the features available, that hasn't changed. A lot of what's been added just isn't much use to us.
 
B. They think they do not need OS support or features newer than CS6, and they’re wrong.
No, lots of us really don't need any of the new 'features'. Most owners never used any more than a small sub-set of the features available, that hasn't changed. A lot of what's been added just isn't much use to us.
I was a happy user of LR 6.14 and Photoshop CS6 until a couple of months ago. What got me to change was that I have always needed a better 'replace' feature for my traveling. When your time is limited in a given place you can't wait for someone to drive away that darn parked car or, more often, you have to compete with the other tourists who like to get in your photos. I would work for hours to get a proper fill for the removed figures/cars/whatever. And also power lines. (Now I would not dare to remove power lines from my St Peterburg [Russia] photos because nobody would believe I could get a photo without power lines -- hundreds of them. My final product has to have some kind of relation to reality.)

So, enter various AI solutions to removing and replacing. My upgrade path for a fast computer was a Mac M1 Airbook - that meant those old programs would not run. I took the money I was spending on Britbox and it now pays my Adobe subscription.

It was all about that one feature.
 
B. They think they do not need OS support or features newer than CS6, and they’re wrong.
No, lots of us really don't need any of the new 'features'. Most owners never used any more than a small sub-set of the features available, that hasn't changed. A lot of what's been added just isn't much use to us.
He did say that's one of the 'most common' reasons - not that it's the only reason, or even the main reason. Still, I don't see how he can know how common that is ... or why he thinks so many people are 'wrong' about what they need.

My conclusion is that there's no actual meaning in that, and it's just there for cleverness.
 
Last edited:

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top