Archiver
Veteran
I only needed to buy my gear once. Why should I be forced to pay in perpetuity for software? Simple math shows that buying a good product once and using it for over ten years is a better use of money than paying for something every month if the upgrades aren't doing anything extra for me.
The issue with Adobe is that they no longer offer a standalone price. I haven't bought LR for many years, which means my dollar went a lot further than upgrading with every new release. With DNG Converter, I haven't needed to upgrade, albeit with the inconvenience of converting later camera files. By only offering a subscription service, Adobe forces people into three choices:
1. pay a monthly fee in perpetuity to use the software, regardless of whether later software is necessary
2. move to alternative software that may not be to their entire liking
3. stick with existing Adobe standalone software
By only offering subscription, Adobe is restricting the choices of those who may otherwise want to use their software. At least other companies offer this choice.
Full disclosure: I pay the subscription for Adobe Premiere Pro because I have a lot of projects tied up in it. But as I learn to use Davinci Resolve and start new projects, I'll move away from Adobe entirely if possible. Premiere Pro is useful, but it is unstable and buggy, especially with new releases, and I use a very decent computer - a one time, standalone purchase, mind you. Annoyingly, complete migration may never happen because there are a few projects which I may need to revisit in years to come, so I may have to keep paying Adobe for the option of future editing. If I can find a solution to this, I'll do it.
boojum
Ignoble Miscreant
Well, they do not support NATO secondary image transfer file format...
I had to look up JPEG-XL:
Looks like beyond JPEG-2000.
And then there is HEIF which can do 10 bit color depth but is not much implemented. My X2D will make HEIF files. I have no other camera which will do this. And while the 8-bit JPG SOOC's from the X2D are really wonderful I do wish I could post, store on Flickr, and use HEIF. Someday. I do not believe that RFF accepts HEIF format files.
chuckroast
Well-known
I think this is a bit of a false equivalence. You may only buy equipment once, but you have to pay to maintain and adjust it.
With software, you do that for a lot less and you get new fearures. My only complaint is when an upgrade removes control of my own data or obsoletes the format.
Last edited:
boojum
Ignoble Miscreant
It seems, if I follow this thread correctly, that most of us do not need all the bells and whistles of a subscription package. Of those who do think they need all those bells and whistles many can be served by freeware. And the freeware is great. Don't take my word for it. There are folks who manage images at the bit level for a living who do quite well with freeware. That's knowing image manipulation from the ground up. Maybe these folks know something that can benefit the rest of us. I can only speak for myself but I do not hear better with my mouth open.
So it is choices. It is not fiat.
So it is choices. It is not fiat.
chuckroast
Well-known
I got it from this link ^
ART (Another RAW Therapee)
ART (Another RAW Therapee), free download for Windows. Advanced image manipulation with RAW and other formats for the discerning photographer.another-raw-therapee-art.en.lo4d.com
Also has a forum-
ART
Welcome to the users forum of <a href="https://art.pixls.us">ART</a>, a free, open-source, cross-platform raw image processing program. ART is a derivative of the popular <a href="http://rawtherapee.com">RawTherapee</a>, trading a bit of customization and control over various processing...discuss.pixls.us
Edit- and seems to have moved here:
A newer version of ART was released in September 2024. I just installed it, and copied the ".DCP" files to the "C:\ART\1.21.3\dcpprofiles" directory of my installation.
LR4.4 and LR6 use the same file format as ART and RT. You may copy the files from Lightroom to them, note the exact name used for the camera in ART and RT must be the same as the filename.
"Leica Camera AG M9 Digital Camera" used for the name in ART corresponds to "Leica Camera AG M9 Digital Camera.DCP" in the folder.
I also have a thread on my forum to share tips and expeirence.
ART. Darktable, and Raw Therapee- Share Notes Open-Source Image Processing Software.
I installed "ART", Another Raw Therapee" fork on my HP Tower yesterday. I bought a Nikon Z5 this week, and needed new software to process the .NEF files from the Z5. As Adobe no longer sells Stand-Alone licenses for Lightroom, I am done with them. I've used Adobe Photoshop for 30 years, starting...rangefinderforum.com
Is there a single place to look for DCP files for other cameras not included in the distro or is that a hunt-and-peck kind of thing. Say I want one for a D-Lux 6 or a Sony DSC-F505, for example (I own neither, it's just a test case).
Many DCP Files come with the free installation with ART.
They will be in the "DCPPROFILES" folder,
C:\ART\1.21.3\dcpprofiles
DCP profiles only apply to RAW formatted images.
The D-LUX 6 came with Lightroom, according to the manual.
On my computer, your DCP file is here:
C:\Program Files\Adobe\Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 4.4\Resources\CameraProfiles\Adobe Standard
LR 4.4 uses sRGB for output.
7Artisans 75/1.25, wide-open on the M9. ISO2500.
ART offers two sRGB output profiles.
Same DCP file used, Tone Curves selected. The ART image lifted the shadow detail more than the LR image.
I could change the latter to be even closer to LR, but at this point which is "better" is subjective.
7Artisans 75/1.25, wide-open on the M9. ISO2500.
ART offers two sRGB output profiles.
Same DCP file used, Tone Curves selected. The ART image lifted the shadow detail more than the LR image.
I could change the latter to be even closer to LR, but at this point which is "better" is subjective.
Last edited:
boojum
Ignoble Miscreant
There is also a LR program which has within it or generates a slew of DCP files and this program is free for public use. What is it?
Archiver
Veteran
But I'm not paying a monthly fee for as long as I want to use my gear. And it's not like my gear will suddenly vanish or become useless if I stop paying monthly subscription fees. I can count on the fingers of one hand the times I've had to pay to have my gear serviced in over 20 years of shooting. I don't know too many photographers who send their DSLR's/mirrorless cameras for biannual maintenance.
If have to keep paying every month, which adds up to far more money over the lifespan of a potential standalone purchase, I have issues with that. I've survived quite well with LR4 for over 12 years.
Last edited:
bullterrier
Established
I'm proud to say My computer is adobe free 
C:\ProgramData\Adobe\CameraRaw\CameraProfiles\Adobe Standard
@chuckroast
You can download the raw to DNG converter from above, it is free. It is 1.5GBytes in size.
This has the lens profiles and camera profiles included in it.
Once installed, you can find the Profiles under a directory:
C:\ProgramData\Adobe\CameraRaw
C:\ProgramData\Adobe\CameraRaw\CameraProfiles\Adobe Standard
You have to know where to look, the directory is not easy to find.
For the Leica M9:
M9 Digital Camera Adobe Standard
You will need to rename the file for the M9 when using in ART.
The "ProgramData" directory does not show up in normal directory listings. It is a Hidden Directory. That made it take about 2 minutes longer for me to find.
c:\>dir/a:h pr*.*
Volume in drive C is Windows
Volume Serial Number is 8E23-5964
Directory of c:\
11/12/2024 01:01 PM <DIR> ProgramData
0 File(s) 0 bytes
1 Dir(s) 87,314,784,256 bytes free
Last edited:
Benjamin Marks
Veteran
Dudes. I was going to write, "and Dudettes," but women in general have too much sense to actually get in an argument over software. Sitting back with the popcorn. . . pass the digital salt.
As I used to tell people over 40 years ago, "This is what happens when you use software that you did not even write yourself".
At least this thread prodded me into finding the DCP profiles that were obviously being used by ART, provided by Adobe. Too funny that the DNG convertor is 1.5GBytes on the download, but the files installed under "C:\Program Files\Adobe\Adobe DNG Converter" are only 200MBytes. Hidden Program Data Directory. Who woulda thunk it. 2 Minutes.
ANYWAY: I like open source software. The Watcom 2017 compilers are very good, free. There is a lot of talent out there, and too many choices to be locked into one piece of software that everyone must agree to. And with open-source software you can even write it yourself if you want to change how it works. Think of it as DIY. I've been doing this for far too long (1979, "scanning densitometer" to digitize film) for anyone to tell me what I must use for image processing software.
Footnote:
c:\>attrib programdata -h
from the command prompt after installing the software will "unhide" the programdata directory and make things much easier to find.
The old DOS Attrib command lives on.
Last edited:
ART. Darktable, and Raw Therapee- Share Notes Open-Source Image Processing Software.
There is real truth to that. As a result I've gotten myself into the habit of grabbing one of the my three "mains" no matter why I'm going out the door. You should see the looks I get from family at times ;) That said, you made a wonderful image with your phone - thank you for posting it. I...
rangefinderforum.com
I've made the open-source Processing Thread a "Sticky" on my forum.
I just posted a "walk-Through" for using the DCP files from Adobe Camera Raw directly from ART.
I just verified that Raw Therapee will also work with the CameraRaw DCP files.
If you feel uncomfortable "unhiding" the ProgramData directory, you can always copy the files to another directory and then Hide the subdirectory again.
boojum
Ignoble Miscreant
ART. Darktable, and Raw Therapee- Share Notes Open-Source Image Processing Software.
There is real truth to that. As a result I've gotten myself into the habit of grabbing one of the my three "mains" no matter why I'm going out the door. You should see the looks I get from family at times ;) That said, you made a wonderful image with your phone - thank you for posting it. I...
I've made the open-source Processing Thread a "Sticky" on my forum.
I just posted a "walk-Through" for using the DCP files from Adobe Camera Raw directly from ART.
I just verified that Raw Therapee will also work with the CameraRaw DCP files.
If you feel uncomfortable "unhiding" the ProgramData directory, you can always copy the files to another directory and then Hide the subdirectory again.
Thanks for the work. Knowing is one thing, sharing is another.
chuckroast
Well-known
ART. Darktable, and Raw Therapee- Share Notes Open-Source Image Processing Software.
There is real truth to that. As a result I've gotten myself into the habit of grabbing one of the my three "mains" no matter why I'm going out the door. You should see the looks I get from family at times ;) That said, you made a wonderful image with your phone - thank you for posting it. I...
I've made the open-source Processing Thread a "Sticky" on my forum.
I just posted a "walk-Through" for using the DCP files from Adobe Camera Raw directly from ART.
I just verified that Raw Therapee will also work with the CameraRaw DCP files.
If you feel uncomfortable "unhiding" the ProgramData directory, you can always copy the files to another directory and then Hide the subdirectory again.
Thanks for that. I continue to be convinced that God made film and Satan digital
However, resources like this are still wonderful to have available as I explore my new to me D-Lux Typ 209 and my old to me D750.Happy New Year all.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
If I wanted to be frugal about it, Apple's Photos includes an excellent raw conversion engine that is always kept up to date and performs on par with the best of any of them. Add on Gentlemen Coders RAW Power or Nitro, and you have a functional, better focused on photography image processing tool than Photoshop, IMO.
BUT ... For my $10/month that I pay for Lightroom Classic, I get Lightroom's excellent notion of presets for processing and printing, slide shows, etc. I can modify the processing defaults for each camera I use to suit my needs best. I have access to PS (and other tools Adobe offers) whenever I want/need them. I haven't found any other software with the ease of workflow that LR offers for outputting many different photos in a consistent and reproducible manner, which remains important to me since I often produce several dozen to hundreds of sets of photos in prints or slide shows. Prior to the monthly version of LR, I'd pay $80 or so for major updates every year or so, and I'd only have access to LR. For about $40 more, I get the whole family of useful products. Bad-mouth Adobe all you want, and I have had choice words with them myself over the years, but they produce very good tools that are consistent and reliable as well as easy to use.
Oh yes, and the notion of "well I only paid for my cameras once, why do I have to pay for my software constantly?" ... well, your camera is a discreet object that either works well or doesn't. You buy it, you use it, or not. Software, unless you live in a cave unconnected to the rest of the world and never update your computer, has to deal with changes in its operating environment constantly. This takes development resources (read "money") on an ongoing basis. What the subscription model provides for Adobe is a consistent income so that they can continue to keep the software up to date and compatible with all the various computer OS changes in a timely manner. For the end users, it provides more capability and ongoing compatibility at similar prices compared to perpetual licensing.
With all that said, go make photographs, and use whatever tools work for you to render and produce your desired results.
G
BUT ... For my $10/month that I pay for Lightroom Classic, I get Lightroom's excellent notion of presets for processing and printing, slide shows, etc. I can modify the processing defaults for each camera I use to suit my needs best. I have access to PS (and other tools Adobe offers) whenever I want/need them. I haven't found any other software with the ease of workflow that LR offers for outputting many different photos in a consistent and reproducible manner, which remains important to me since I often produce several dozen to hundreds of sets of photos in prints or slide shows. Prior to the monthly version of LR, I'd pay $80 or so for major updates every year or so, and I'd only have access to LR. For about $40 more, I get the whole family of useful products. Bad-mouth Adobe all you want, and I have had choice words with them myself over the years, but they produce very good tools that are consistent and reliable as well as easy to use.
Oh yes, and the notion of "well I only paid for my cameras once, why do I have to pay for my software constantly?" ... well, your camera is a discreet object that either works well or doesn't. You buy it, you use it, or not. Software, unless you live in a cave unconnected to the rest of the world and never update your computer, has to deal with changes in its operating environment constantly. This takes development resources (read "money") on an ongoing basis. What the subscription model provides for Adobe is a consistent income so that they can continue to keep the software up to date and compatible with all the various computer OS changes in a timely manner. For the end users, it provides more capability and ongoing compatibility at similar prices compared to perpetual licensing.
With all that said, go make photographs, and use whatever tools work for you to render and produce your desired results.
G
chuckroast
Well-known
Well that's just crazy talk. If people don't take contrary positions, how can we have an argument
In the 1980s, when I was working on Digital Imagers in the Research Lab- my boss asked "what are you going to do when your chosen profession makes your favorite hobby obsolete?" 40 years later- not worried about it.Thanks for that. I continue to be convinced that God made film and Satan digital
Happy New Year all.
Last edited:
Archiver
Veteran
As far as Adobe products go, Premiere Pro has been buggy and laggy for years, and I've only stuck with it because many projects are tied up in it. Ironically, the most recent version of Premiere Pro causes my computer to hang, so I use the second last version, which is the most stable version for my system so far.
I have not paid for Lightroom in over 12 years. This was a buy-it-once scenario. And out of principle, I dislike giving more money to a company that removed the choice of a standalone vs subscription payment, where my ability to use the current software ceases the month I stop payment, regardless of how many hundreds of dollars I've spent on it beforehand. In this instance, I would rather not enter a rental plan for something which was previously available for outright purchase. Capture One standalone might be expensive, but at least they give us this choice.
If you buy software, it works well or it doesn't. I've used LR4 for over 12 years, moving from Windows 7 to 10, with no issue other than having to convert later camera files to DNG. If LR4 ever stops working on future Windows versions, I'll have to seriously look at switching. Aside from that, the changes in OS environments from 2010 to 2024 have not affected my ability to use LR4 at all. Lucky, I guess.
The other issue is whether you get a choice. Does the software company offer a standalone package, or is it subscription only? And if the software works well now, why not have the choice of being able to use it for as long as your current OS supports it?
Of course, if someone's financial situation is such that paying a small rental fee each month is viable, whereas a large upfront fee isn't, then it makes sense. Or maybe using software for a year only until a suitable alternative becomes available is more financially worthwhile than paying more in a standalone fee.
We all spend our money the way we see fit.
Last edited: