Sideshot wrote in post #18517774
Just comparing Photoscape to Lightroom. Photoshop is a different animal a much more powerful animal. PhotoscapeX is like Lightroom it is for adjustments before Photoshop work.
But the point is still valid, you get Lr for free with Ps, or of course you get Ps free with Lr if you are looking at CC Classic. Actually since Adobe also give you ACR along with Ps, and Bridge now being free for everybody, it poses some interesting questions. Are you going to be using Ps CC? If yes then you get the choice of a very good RAW converter, with absolutely no attached DAM at all, just use ACR. Although Bridge is a very good file manager program, with plenty of useful multimedia functionality, along with a lot of tight Adobe integration. I use Bridge quite a bit, even though I access all my photographic images via Lr.
Adobe also throw in Lr for free if you want a heavyweight database driven DAM application that can make looking after your images incredibly simple. With a really good RAW converter, essentially ACR, directly incorporated directly in the same user interface. As far as I'm aware nobody else has quite the same level of combined DAM and RAW functionality within a single application interface. C1 Pro probably comes closest to the full versatility of Lr, but it is a much more expensive proposition.
Although Lr and Ps, along with Bridge when necessary, are my main workhorses when it comes to my photos, I do have DPP 4, and DPP 3 since I need support for my old 300D and my 20D which I use as a second camera, as well as DXO 10, Picture Window, FastRawViewer, GIMP, and ICE on my computer. Thanks to the abjectly bad predecessor to DPP being essentially unuseable, I ended up using RawShooter Essentials as my first real RAW converter, and when Adobe bought the program and incorporated it in ACR and Lr I moved first to ACR, and then as my image collection grew, I moved to Lr in 2011 at about the time of the first Lr4 public Beta release. So a large part of my sticking with ACR/Lr is the fact that I am used to the way the programs operate, and I don't have to invest in significant learning of an entirely new system. Especially in regards to all the DAM features I regularly use in Lr.
I have always used Ps along with the RAW converters, although given how good the RAW converters have now got, I tend not to need to use Ps nearly as often as I used to do. Buying Lr 4 was nice as it gave me the DAM I was looking for, along with the new version of the process version, without the need to upgrade from Ps CS5. I only upgraded to CC because I needed the HiDPI support for my Dell 5K monitor. As things stand paying monthly is for me an accessible means to achieving the upgrade. I could not have afforded the sort of money that the perpetual licence upgrade would have cost me in one lump sum.
Given that I am, and probably would be, paying for Ps anyway; any alternative to Lr/ACR would have to have some very significant advantages or be the same effective cost.