Is just me or Skylum Luminar NEO jumps onto subscription model? Too?

[shineofleo]

I bought Luminar AI years ago and I am quite happy with it - price is good, permanent license, function is easy to use. I use it mostly for lazy-project which I don't want to spend too much time on. It is quite slow to export but I can understand due to much AI algorithm.

Then Skylum tried to sell Luminar NEO. Today I found out that the 'old' Luminar AI can not be easily found/download/purchase and I think NEO is going to take place of it. Then the pricing:

It goes subscription model, while keep the permanent license solution. For current Luminar AI user, it is $119 for license and $99 for one year subscription. BUT, there is so-called '2022 extension pack' including HDR, noiselss, AI background removal etc. It is included in subscription, but not in license. If you want it you have to buy separately which is $269 for current user and $299.

As we all know that Adobe is much hated for the subscription model, and that's the reason several company jumped out and shouted for 'one-time license' model, and people were excited. But now, obviously they gradually suck the customer into subscription model as well.

Luminar NEO coined the concept 'extension' is a very good example. The license is still there, but much function has been separated. Good job!

Capture One is similar. License model lacks of updating so you virtually need to pay to get newer version, every year. To be fair, if the software is good, there is no complaints, no matter license or subscription. But it is just disguisting to attracting customer by some false impression - such as 'we hate subscription' 'let's do permanent license'.

All of above is a result of thinking, after I read the article here in DPR and tried Affinity Photo v2. At lease for now, this company is doing what they promised and keep doing it. More importantly, the software is not bad at all.

As a photographer who needs real and good software, I feel much helpless.

 

[Digital Nigel]

In fact, Affinity not only provides a perpetual licence, but also delivers free updates for several years. It's cheaper than Neo, and includes the capabilities of several of the extensions, plus a depth of other capabilities way beyond any Luminar products. I purchased Neo, but seldom use it, as it usually disappoints. You can do a bad job easily and quickly, but a good job is almost beyond reach.

Affinity 2 is a far better buy.

 

[shineofleo]

It is the same everywhere: those who don't do much photo/retouching work own the company and they don't care about how customers' experience. Afterall it is all about money and business.

Making money is fine, just please make sure the product is good.

Or maybe they don't care, because too many users and only a small part of them care about it!

 

[Digital Nigel]

It is the same everywhere: those who don't do much photo/retouching work own the company and they don't care about how customers' experience. Afterall it is all about money and business.

Making money is fine, just please make sure the product is good.

Or maybe they don't care, because too many users and only a small part of them care about it!

There's a few things I don't like about Skylum:

1. It has had a bad habit of abandoning young products and starting again, producing a new product with roughly similar functionality, but not upwards compatible.
2. It sells and charges for pre-released products, so you have to take on trust what might be coming
3. It sells and charges for future products whose functions aren't even disclosed.
4. Instead of free trials, you are expected to buy, and then ask for a refund if not happy.
5. The products seem designed for nice demos on stock images, but when you come to use them on complex, real images, you find they lack key functions, and produce poor quality output.

 

[Glen Barrington]

ACDSee continues to offer both, which has kept me in the ACDSee camp for quite some time. It's been a while since I've used Luminar so I don't really know much about how they market it.

I don't mind getting a subscription offer, as long as I know I'm going to upgrade anyway, it is usually a bit cheaper that way. But my productivity is slowing down, and I'm not sure I want to keep up in that way anymore. So I am thinking about reverting back to a permanent license with a 2-3 year upgrade gap.

 

[Euell]

It is the same everywhere: those who don't do much photo/retouching work own the company and they don't care about how customers' experience. Afterall it is all about money and business.

Making money is fine, just please make sure the product is good.

Or maybe they don't care, because too many users and only a small part of them care about it!

There's a few things I don't like about Skylum:

1. It has had a bad habit of abandoning young products and starting again, producing a new product with roughly similar functionality, but not upwards compatible.
2. It sells and charges for pre-released products, so you have to take on trust what might be coming
3. It sells and charges for future products whose functions aren't even disclosed.
4. Instead of free trials, you are expected to buy, and then ask for a refund if not happy.
5. The products seem designed for nice demos on stock images, but when you come to use them on complex, real images, you find they lack key functions, and produce poor quality output.

It is what it is, but betting on the come with any software is a mistake. Bundling multiple new, unreviewed extensions on a subscription basis is strange marketing, The base software does some things well, however.

 

[Digital Nigel]

It is the same everywhere: those who don't do much photo/retouching work own the company and they don't care about how customers' experience. Afterall it is all about money and business.

Making money is fine, just please make sure the product is good.

Or maybe they don't care, because too many users and only a small part of them care about it!

There's a few things I don't like about Skylum:

1. It has had a bad habit of abandoning young products and starting again, producing a new product with roughly similar functionality, but not upwards compatible.
2. It sells and charges for pre-released products, so you have to take on trust what might be coming
3. It sells and charges for future products whose functions aren't even disclosed.
4. Instead of free trials, you are expected to buy, and then ask for a refund if not happy.
5. The products seem designed for nice demos on stock images, but when you come to use them on complex, real images, you find they lack key functions, and produce poor quality output.

It is what it is, but betting on the come with any software is a mistake. Bundling multiple new, unreviewed extensions on a subscription basis is strange marketing, The base software does some things well, however.

Does it have a basic Undo/Redo capability for each edit step? I tried to use the rather-basic new Clone feature, and wanted to undo the last step, but couldn't see how to.

 

[Euell]

It is the same everywhere: those who don't do much photo/retouching work own the company and they don't care about how customers' experience. Afterall it is all about money and business.

Making money is fine, just please make sure the product is good.

Or maybe they don't care, because too many users and only a small part of them care about it!

There's a few things I don't like about Skylum:

1. It has had a bad habit of abandoning young products and starting again, producing a new product with roughly similar functionality, but not upwards compatible.
2. It sells and charges for pre-released products, so you have to take on trust what might be coming
3. It sells and charges for future products whose functions aren't even disclosed.
4. Instead of free trials, you are expected to buy, and then ask for a refund if not happy.
5. The products seem designed for nice demos on stock images, but when you come to use them on complex, real images, you find they lack key functions, and produce poor quality output.

It is what it is, but betting on the come with any software is a mistake. Bundling multiple new, unreviewed extensions on a subscription basis is strange marketing, The base software does some things well, however.

Does it have a basic Undo/Redo capability for each edit step? I tried to use the rather-basic new Clone feature, and wanted to undo the last step, but couldn't see how to.

There’s a back arrow for each process. I do cloning in PS. However, the context-aware erasure feature beats out PS.

 

[mujana]

I used Luminar 4 in the past. Although some things seemed ok, they didn’t work flawlessly (like sky replacement). I then decided not to get anything from Skylum again. Now Neo also looks good again, but I’m very confused about there selling strategy now. Also about quality. I do not want any subscription and that package seems way overpriced. Maybe someone can comment on both quality and the possibility of buying individual items of their extensions package?

 

[Digital Nigel]

It is the same everywhere: those who don't do much photo/retouching work own the company and they don't care about how customers' experience. Afterall it is all about money and business.

Making money is fine, just please make sure the product is good.

Or maybe they don't care, because too many users and only a small part of them care about it!

There's a few things I don't like about Skylum:

1. It has had a bad habit of abandoning young products and starting again, producing a new product with roughly similar functionality, but not upwards compatible.
2. It sells and charges for pre-released products, so you have to take on trust what might be coming
3. It sells and charges for future products whose functions aren't even disclosed.
4. Instead of free trials, you are expected to buy, and then ask for a refund if not happy.
5. The products seem designed for nice demos on stock images, but when you come to use them on complex, real images, you find they lack key functions, and produce poor quality output.

It is what it is, but betting on the come with any software is a mistake. Bundling multiple new, unreviewed extensions on a subscription basis is strange marketing, The base software does some things well, however.

Does it have a basic Undo/Redo capability for each edit step? I tried to use the rather-basic new Clone feature, and wanted to undo the last step, but couldn't see how to.

There’s a back arrow for each process.

Yes, but not for each step. That's appalling, and makes those re-touch features pretty much useless.

I do cloning in PS. However, the context-aware erasure feature beats out PS.

Neo's is much worse than the equivalent in Affinity. Neo also lacks the detailed selection refinement you get in Affinity, making anything that relies on masks pretty much useless in practice, even if it looks cool in a demo.

 

[JohnNewman]

It is the same everywhere: those who don't do much photo/retouching work own the company and they don't care about how customers' experience. Afterall it is all about money and business.

Making money is fine, just please make sure the product is good.

Or maybe they don't care, because too many users and only a small part of them care about it!

There's a few things I don't like about Skylum:

1. It has had a bad habit of abandoning young products and starting again, producing a new product with roughly similar functionality, but not upwards compatible.
2. It sells and charges for pre-released products, so you have to take on trust what might be coming
3. It sells and charges for future products whose functions aren't even disclosed.
4. Instead of free trials, you are expected to buy, and then ask for a refund if not happy.
5. The products seem designed for nice demos on stock images, but when you come to use them on complex, real images, you find they lack key functions, and produce poor quality output.

I largely agree with everything you say. I have tried to support Skylum (not least because they are based in the Ukraine) and have purchased 5 different versions of Luminar and 2 versions of Aurora. In fairness I bought Neo at an early bird price of around £25 so no issue with that.

I was also given the HDR merge extension for free when I pointed this out to them so, again, no issue there.

But I refuse to pay around £180 for other extensions when (a) I don't want them all, (b) I don't even know what they all are yet and (c) when the alternative is taking out a subscription including Neo which I already own outright.

Although Neo isn't bad, it has removed some things from earlier versions (such as Luminar 4 Sky objects for example) and, frankly, it's not as good for Raw processing as other software especially Lightroom.

I've just received my Black Friday email from Topaz and am looking at the AI bundle for c.£135 which I can use for other purposes such as upscaling and improving many older scans and images from older cameras. I have compared Topaz to other offerings for this purpose and prefer to spend my money with them rather than another subscription from Skylum.

It may be that a bit further down the line I'll cancel Adobe and get something like Affinity if I can persuade myself that its Raw processing is as good as Lightroom but I'm starting to move away from DSLRs and may not need either in a year or so when iPhones 15/16 have periscope lenses and 48mp main sensors

In the meantime my Adobe subscription runs until June 2023 and I think that the Topaz software in conjunction with LrC will meet my needs for now.

But I always enjoy reading your posts Digital Nigel as you seem to have a comprehensive knowledge of most software and independent expertise is appreciated and worthwhile,

Regards,

John

 

[northlondon43]

It is the same everywhere: those who don't do much photo/retouching work own the company and they don't care about how customers' experience. Afterall it is all about money and business.

Making money is fine, just please make sure the product is good.

Or maybe they don't care, because too many users and only a small part of them care about it!

There's a few things I don't like about Skylum:

1. It has had a bad habit of abandoning young products and starting again, producing a new product with roughly similar functionality, but not upwards compatible.
2. It sells and charges for pre-released products, so you have to take on trust what might be coming
3. It sells and charges for future products whose functions aren't even disclosed.
4. Instead of free trials, you are expected to buy, and then ask for a refund if not happy.
5. The products seem designed for nice demos on stock images, but when you come to use them on complex, real images, you find they lack key functions, and produce poor quality output.

I largely agree with everything you say. I have tried to support Skylum (not least because they are based in the Ukraine) and have purchased 5 different versions of Luminar and 2 versions of Aurora. In fairness I bought Neo at an early bird price of around £25 so no issue with that.

I was also given the HDR merge extension for free when I pointed this out to them so, again, no issue there.

But I refuse to pay around £180 for other extensions when (a) I don't want them all, (b) I don't even know what they all are yet and (c) when the alternative is taking out a subscription including Neo which I already own outright.

Although Neo isn't bad, it has removed some things from earlier versions (such as Luminar 4 Sky objects for example) and, frankly, it's not as good for Raw processing as other software especially Lightroom.

I've just received my Black Friday email from Topaz and am looking at the AI bundle for c.£135 which I can use for other purposes such as upscaling and improving many older scans and images from older cameras. I have compared Topaz to other offerings for this purpose and prefer to spend my money with them rather than another subscription from Skylum.

It may be that a bit further down the line I'll cancel Adobe and get something like Affinity if I can persuade myself that its Raw processing is as good as Lightroom but I'm starting to move away from DSLRs and may not need either in a year or so when iPhones 15/16 have periscope lenses and 48mp main sensors

In the meantime my Adobe subscription runs until June 2023 and I think that the Topaz software in conjunction with LrC will meet my needs for now.

But I always enjoy reading your posts Digital Nigel as you seem to have a comprehensive knowledge of most software and independent expertise is appreciated and worthwhile,

Regards,

John

Hi John

For what it's worth Skylum currently have an offer where you can purchase any 3 of the extensions for the price of 2, so you choose what you do/don't want. Each extension is £39 here in the UK.

 

[JohnNewman]

But I refuse to pay around £180 for other extensions when (a) I don't want them all, (b) I don't even know what they all are yet and (c) when the alternative is taking out a subscription including Neo which I already own outright.

Hi John

For what it's worth Skylum currently have an offer where you can purchase any 3 of the extensions for the price of 2, so you choose what you do/don't want. Each extension is £39 here in the UK.

Hi

I can't seem to find anything about this, just an increased price of £229 (from £179) for all the extensions. Do you have a link please (I'm also in the UK)?

Thanks,

John

 

[northlondon43]

I was sent an email with the offer a couple of days ago (offer stands until 17th November). It may be that the offer is only available to people who have already purchased Neo so I'd suggest you log into your account and check.

Personally I'm still unsure whether to go for this £78 3 for 2 offer (I think you own the extensions rather than renting them) or the 1 year £79 offer for all extensions.

 

[Digital Nigel]

I was sent an email with the offer a couple of days ago (offer stands until 17th November). It may be that the offer is only available to people who have already purchased Neo so I'd suggest you log into your account and check.

Personally I'm still unsure whether to go for this £78 3 for 2 offer (I think you own the extensions rather than renting them) or the 1 year £79 offer for all extensions.

Are any of the extensions worth having? My reaction so far is that there isn't a single one of them that I want, as I already have other products that do the job better.

 

[northlondon43]

I was sent an email with the offer a couple of days ago (offer stands until 17th November). It may be that the offer is only available to people who have already purchased Neo so I'd suggest you log into your account and check.

Personally I'm still unsure whether to go for this £78 3 for 2 offer (I think you own the extensions rather than renting them) or the 1 year £79 offer for all extensions.

Are any of the extensions worth having? My reaction so far is that there isn't a single one of them that I want, as I already have other products that do the job better.

I guess that depends on the type of photography that you do and, as you say, whether you already have alternative software. I already have the HDR extension which I got for nothing. The focus stacking and background removal extensions do appeal though. I also have Topaz Sharpen and Denoise. I guess I need to decide whether being able to use extensions within one piece of software (as opposed to exporting/reimporting from/to LR to Topaz products,which is a pain) adds enough value to purchase them

 

[Digital Nigel]

I was sent an email with the offer a couple of days ago (offer stands until 17th November). It may be that the offer is only available to people who have already purchased Neo so I'd suggest you log into your account and check.

Personally I'm still unsure whether to go for this £78 3 for 2 offer (I think you own the extensions rather than renting them) or the 1 year £79 offer for all extensions.

Are any of the extensions worth having? My reaction so far is that there isn't a single one of them that I want, as I already have other products that do the job better.

I guess that depends on the type of photography that you do and, as you say, whether you already have alternative software. I already have the HDR extension which I got for nothing.

I'd use Affinity for HDR and focus stacking.

The focus stacking and background removal extensions do appeal though.

I wouldn't trust it mot to mess up the background removal task. The previous fake bokeh portrait tool seemed very attractive, but when I tried to use it, I found that it was very bad at selecting the subject precisely, and refining the mask was a real pain. I could do the whole job far better, far quicker, in Affinity, with much more control.

I also have Topaz Sharpen and Denoise.

Me too, and PhotoLab for the best NR in raw images. I also have Gigapixel for upscaling. I'm reasonably certain that the DxO and Topaz tools work a lot better than the Neo extensions.

So, in each case, I already have a better tool than the extension.

I guess I need to decide whether being able to use extensions within one piece of software (as opposed to exporting/reimporting from/to LR to Topaz products,which is a pain) adds enough value to purchase them

 

[Night Pixel]

Me too, and PhotoLab for the best NR in raw images. I also have Gigapixel for upscaling. I'm reasonably certain that the DxO and Topaz tools work a lot better than the Neo extensions.

So, in each case, I already have a better tool than the extension.

Agree. The Luminar Neo extensions are adequate but not the best in class.

I took a deal for a 1-year sub at $59 USD. After it expires I will dump the subscription. I still have a stand-alone license for Neo to use whatever stuff I want in the original app.

 

[Euell]

It is the same everywhere: those who don't do much photo/retouching work own the company and they don't care about how customers' experience. Afterall it is all about money and business.

Making money is fine, just please make sure the product is good.

Or maybe they don't care, because too many users and only a small part of them care about it!

There's a few things I don't like about Skylum:

1. It has had a bad habit of abandoning young products and starting again, producing a new product with roughly similar functionality, but not upwards compatible.
2. It sells and charges for pre-released products, so you have to take on trust what might be coming
3. It sells and charges for future products whose functions aren't even disclosed.
4. Instead of free trials, you are expected to buy, and then ask for a refund if not happy.
5. The products seem designed for nice demos on stock images, but when you come to use them on complex, real images, you find they lack key functions, and produce poor quality output.

It is what it is, but betting on the come with any software is a mistake. Bundling multiple new, unreviewed extensions on a subscription basis is strange marketing, The base software does some things well, however.

Does it have a basic Undo/Redo capability for each edit step? I tried to use the rather-basic new Clone feature, and wanted to undo the last step, but couldn't see how to.

There’s a back arrow for each process.

Yes, but not for each step. That's appalling, and makes those re-touch features pretty much useless.

I do cloning in PS. However, the context-aware erasure feature beats out PS.

Neo's is much worse than the equivalent in Affinity. Neo also lacks the detailed selection refinement you get in Affinity, making anything that relies on masks pretty much useless in practice, even if it looks cool in a demo.

I find it very good actually. You use a brush for the erase feature, not selection. I wonder about your diatribes on this subject and whether you know what you are talking about.

 

[Euell]

I was sent an email with the offer a couple of days ago (offer stands until 17th November). It may be that the offer is only available to people who have already purchased Neo so I'd suggest you log into your account and check.

Personally I'm still unsure whether to go for this £78 3 for 2 offer (I think you own the extensions rather than renting them) or the 1 year £79 offer for all extensions.

Are any of the extensions worth having? My reaction so far is that there isn't a single one of them that I want, as I already have other products that do the job better.

How would you know the quality of the extensions unless you have worked with them substantially? Have you? Did you purchase the extensions?
Just another Digital Nigel groundless diatribe, I suspect.