Which Photo Editor is Mostly used by Photographer?

Thank you so much for letting me know such detailed info on editing photos using different editors here. Though some of the terms are seeming new to me but I am now going to compare all of them to see the difference!

Tom Reichner wrote in post #17693825
I use iPhoto. And I am sad and frustrated that Apple has discontinued it.

While I have Lightroom, Aperture, and Photoshop Elements, I really only use iPhoto on a regular basis.

I like it so much because it is a RAW converter, meets 99% of my editing needs, and I was able to learn it "instantly". Yup - I never had to take so much as a single minute to figure anything out! Everything iPhoto does is quite intuitive, and I "just knew" where everything was and how to do it, without having to watch a tutorial or anything.......now THAT is my kind of program! ! ! !

shumicse wrote in post #17938228
I have just seen many of the photographers complaining the same as like you. I guess iPhoto was a good option for most of the Apple users. So what are you preferring more now?

Apple replaced iPhoto with "Photos", their new RAW converter / editing program / photo library & management tool.
"Photos" is similar to iPhoto in many ways, and the editing tools it has are actually a bit better than the iPhoto counterparts. But iPhoto had the best (meaning quickest & easiest) customizable slideshow program in the world! Unfortunately, with "Photos" slideshow program it takes several minutes to create a slideshow, while with iPhoto it took, literally, a few seconds. For those of us who watch our own slideshows multiple times every single day, this makes a huge difference.

.

I use Lightroom and Photoshop CC. I tried Capture One a while back, but the seamless Photoshop integration keeps me coming back to Adobe.

Not a fan of Lightroom at all. I have it and Silver Efex they came with my MM and I don't like either. I start in Adobe Camera Raw and finish in CS6. To me photoshop is much more like working in the wet darkroom.

airfrogusmc wrote in post #17940104
Not a fan of Lightroom at all. I have it and Silver Efex they came with my MM and I don't like either. I start in Adobe Camera Raw and finish in CS6. To me photoshop is much more like working in the wet darkroom.

Have you tried the latest one? Local edits make it a much more viable option. Prior to CC is not as good.

Love Lightroom 5.

Adobe totally and utterly turned me off with Lightroom CC and its watered-down Lightroom 6...

I ended up getting the newest Photoshop Elements 14 that oddly included two features Lr6 was lacking.

Will likely get Lightroom 7 if it is ever released. Meanwhile Lr5 does it for me, nicely. Simply refuse to pay adobe or any corporation monthly while I have options otherwise. No need for photoshop (as in the Photoshop/Lightroom CC thing), I use Photophop Elements 2% of the time and only 2% of its features.

May eventually have to convert my Raw files to Adobe DNG down the road as I upgrade Canon bodies. No biggie.

Immaculens wrote in post #17940375
Love Lightroom 5.

Adobe totally and utterly turned me off with Lightroom CC and its watered-down Lightroom 6...

I ended up getting the newest Photoshop Elements 14 that oddly included two features Lr6 was lacking.

Will likely get Lightroom 7 if it is ever released. Meanwhile Lr5 does it for me, nicely. Simply refuse to pay adobe or any corporation monthly while I have options otherwise. No need for photoshop (as in the Photoshop/Lightroom CC thing), I use Photophop Elements 2% of the time and only 2% of its features.

May eventually have to convert my Raw files to Adobe DNG down the road as I upgrade Canon bodies. No biggie.

I find the $10 per month perfectly reasonable for the Lightroom + Photoshop CC set. Cheaper than upgrading each year with purely Lightroom from the numbers I saw, and you get Photoshop. I moved to the full suite after a couple of years. The expense is justifiable in my situation and funds their research and development and moves them towards an "always in development" release cycle akin to Google as opposed to the previous slow burn cycles.

I use PhotoLine.

Very close to Photoshop in editing capabilities for a fraction of its price. Will run Photoshop plugins.

I've used Adobe photoshop, bridge and Iilustrator since 1994(version 3.0) professionally and for my photography. Tried CC, didn't like it and sticking with CS6 for now. Tried Lightroom, ran like a dog on my machine.

Yeah I've tried it but really don't care for it. The newest version came with my M 262. Not as intuitive for me. I have and use CS6 and will use it until it is no longer support by my OS. I will only get the subscription when i have no other choice.

I have PhotoShop, Lightroom, Aperture, OnOne Photo Suite, and Dxo Optics Pro 10. I used PS for many years, and I still hate it.
My favorite is DXO. I can do more faster with it, as the raws look better from the beginning. I use OnOne to cull, then DXO to pp.

shiftlens wrote in post #17943487
...My favorite is DXO. I can do more faster with it, as the raws look better from the beginning. I use OnOne to cull, then DXO to pp.

<rant>The above gives me hope that "At Least Something" will continue to drive Adobe to keep improving their products.

They are enjoying obscene record revenues because of so many buying into subscriptions. Previously - their primary motivation to "improve upon a version of a product like Lr 4 to Lr 5 was by adding 'great new features' - so if the features are actually great - people would upgrade and pay the $79. And of course, so they bought Adobe vs competitors.

Now that Adobe is getting record sales and quarterly increases by subscriptions - what is their ongoing (think 1.5 yrs from now) motivation to continually improve their product? Will they decrease their R&D staff? Luckily there are users out there like Shiftlens preferring alternate software - investing in "their" R&D - so that Adobe continues to have competition, thus a motivation to continue timely little upgrades and features.

I know, I know, I hear the arguments "But the Adobe subscription "saves you money".

For me - $80 for a new version every 12-15 months is cheaper than $120 every 12 months. I don't need or want PS.

I know, I know, it is just the way it is now. But again - I love that Adobe has viable competition.</rant>

Immaculens wrote in post #17943527
<rant>The above gives me hope that "At Least Something" will continue to drive Adobe to keep improving their products.

They are enjoying obscene record revenues because of so many buying into subscriptions. Previously - their primary motivation to "improve upon a version of a product like Lr 4 to Lr 5 was by adding 'great new features' - so if the features are actually great - people would upgrade and pay the $79. And of course, so they bought Adobe vs competitors.

Now that Adobe is getting record sales and quarterly increases by subscriptions - what is their ongoing (think 1.5 yrs from now) motivation to continually improve their product? Will they decrease their R&D staff? Luckily there are users out there like Shiftlens preferring alternate software - investing in "their" R&D - so that Adobe continues to have competition, thus a motivation to continue timely little upgrades and features.

I know, I know, I hear the arguments "But the Adobe subscription "saves you money".

For me - $80 for a new version every 12-15 months is cheaper than $120 every 12 months. I don't need or want PS.

I know, I know, it is just the way it is now. But again - I love that Adobe has viable competition.</rant>

There have been a ton of new features added with the development of Photoshop CC. See the difference between the first CC and the 2015 Edition CC Photoshop. The better cash flow, the more engineers they can hire. Try it out, or at least read the release notes, before you hypothesize and theorize the effects of subscription on incentivizing development.

shiftlens wrote in post #17943487
I have PhotoShop, Lightroom, Aperture, OnOne Photo Suite, and Dxo Optics Pro 10. I used PS for many years, and I still hate it.
My favorite is DXO. I can do more faster with it, as the raws look better from the beginning. I use OnOne to cull, then DXO to pp.

DXO? Besides you, who uses DXO? Were you using Photoshop Creative Suite, if so, what was the latest version you were using? Elements isn't the same.

Immaculens wrote in post #17943527
For me - $80 for a new version every 12-15 months is cheaper than $120 every 12 months.

For me it is cheaper, too. In fact, if I were a PS user, I would hardly ever need an upgrade, so I would probably only spend that $80 once every four years, on average. So yes, $20 a year is much, much cheaper than $120 a year. And finding a way to save $100 a year is actually a pretty big deal.

.