Yes Molly, you're right: purchasing some of the programs outright was wildly expensive, so I can see that the subscription model works better for some users. I'm flashing onto Quark as I write this and remember how financially stunned I was when I first purchased that oh so many years ago. I haven't used it in forever, so don't need to worry about that program anymore. Hmmm. . . let's see. . . it's still available: for a tidy sum of $849 for an original purchase (there's a $399 "competitive upgrade" price if you qualify). I do have to smile at Quark's promo: "Escape the Cloud - Boost Your Productivity!". (Plus: get pdfToolbox, a $590 value FREE) :)


On Nov 17, 2017, at 6:44 AM, Molly Higgins wrote:

Yes, thank you Lynette--believe me I understand, and like everyone else I was really put off by the subscription plan in the beginning, but I've come around to really appreciate the tradeoff. I bought a couple different CS versions outright over the years, paying about $900 each time, a terrifying sum to a freelance budget...personally speaking $50 a month is a lot more manageable, and despite the subscription model I do feel like I've bought a "product" (no less a product than that dusty stack of adobe cds on my shelf over there, next to the zip discs :D) It allows me to offer services/products I couldn't otherwise, and I feel a lot more "plugged in," if that makes sense--valuable in a line of work that can make one feel like Robinson Crusoe. :)


On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 8:31 AM, Bruce Bartrug <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Lynette, your response to Molly's question was right on the money, and the main reason so many rejected Adobe's subscription model for photo software.

On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 11:10 PM, Bruce Bartrug <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
I'm also retired, and have had to relearn the meaning of the word, frugal.  To me the Adobe subscription service was a shot in the foot, and not from my own gun if you get my drift.  And now they've shot the other foot, too, by shutting down Lightroom.  Whether or not one wants "all the bells and whistles" is a moot point when all one needs is Photoshop, updated every few years.  I can understand that others may need access to the whole creative cloud.  To me, and to much of the photo world including pros, the subscription only option was the beginning of the search for different software.  Photoshop is still the best option in my just needs to find a raw conversion software that will produce files compatible with PS.  Others have abandoned Adobe completely, and in a way I can't blame them.  Mixing and matching is, today at least, the best option.


Need to leave or subscribe to the Sciart-L listserv? Follow the instructions at