You may frequently hear complaints about Lightroom and Photoshop — too buggy, too slow, too bloated, too expensive — but it doesn’t seem to be putting a dent in Adobe’s performance. In fact, it’s quite the opposite as the company announced last week that it has achieved record revenues for the second fiscal quarter of this year.
As reported in a press release last week, Adobe generated $2.74 billion in the second quarter of 2019, a record for the company and a growth of 25 percent year-over-year. The success is attributed to “the explosion of creativity across the globe,” the need for companies to deliver “engaging customer experiences,” and their “strong ecosystem of partners.”
Many photographers have objected to the shift to a subscription-based model and given the complaints, you’d be forgiven for thinking that Lightroom is falling from favor in face of competition from Capture One and a growing assortment of alternatives such as ACDSee, Luminar and ON1. Photoshop is also seeing strong challenges from Affinity Photo and Pixelmator Pro.
Despite the anecdotal grievances, Adobe appears to be doing better than ever. Recently, photographers were angered by Adobe’s removal of Adobe’s $9.99 photography package, a move that proved to be temporary and only disappeared while the company was “running a number of tests,” according to an Adobe spokesperson.
Personally, I’m excited to see what Affinity has planned for the future. I’ve been using the beta version of Affinity Publisher over the last six months (the final version has just been released), and with the success of Affinity Photo, I’m crossing my fingers for a Lightroom alternative. Affinity appears to be focused on creating seamless integration between its various packages, now allowing image editing and vector design tools to be used in Publisher without switching applications. Creating something that works together as well as Lightroom and Photoshop — if not more so — is an exciting prospect.
Is Adobe printing money without enough care for its customers? Or is their performance proof that they are continuing to dominate the field with software that’s designed for professionals? Please leave your thoughts in the comments.
Not me...I don't mind the new business model at all. My gripe is with the buggy updates, lack of design around higher spec computing systems...and the glacially slow response times to support questions.
So it's working out great then ... Adobe gets your money each month ... and you get to gripe each month. Seems like a good deal ... for Adobe.
This.
This indeed. I would have a whole lot less problems giving them my money every month if the goddamn LR software would just work flawlessly and smoothly. I downloaded Capture One but didn't get to learn it before the end of my trial period... Too steep learning curve, too little time :(
I do mind that Adobe is abusing its diminishing monopoly position within the photography market. Each new invocation of both Photoshop and Lightroom brings negligible improvements and some may argue that Lightroom is starting to fail with serious slowdowns and bugs.
Like many I have already started a shift towards both Affinity and Luminar and am prepared to walk.
Professionals do not pay for Adobes software (their customers do) so why should they care?
I'm moving to DaVinci Resolve when my yearly sub is up.
This.
I'm already on Resolve for my video needs but I was starting from scratch so I did not have to worry about the learning curve. I would have had it with Premiere too but refused to pay for what so many people call a buggy program.
Bugs are my reason for leaving as well Premiere. Crash on save as, crash on export media, lags requiring reboot, etc.
I plan on building a new system in the fall, if it's the same mess, I'll look into Resolve. But I read that you can't use 3 monitors or edit 4k with the free version. That true?
I built a new system 1 year ago to get LR to work faster. It did not change anything (what a waste of money...). When a program is buggy, I guess it doesn't matter how powerful the system is.
Unfortunately I can't answer your question. I needed advanced noise reduction so I purchased the paid version almost right away. You can find out quite easily though, just download the free version and try ;)
I've been an editor for nearly 25 years, run the gamut of NLEs and been on Final Cut Pro X for 8 years and absolutely LOVING it. If you're on a Mac and NOT using FCP, that's your loss… in stability and most of all SPEED! Nothing comes anywhere close.
Oh, and never mind that it's a PAY ONCE, UPDATES FOREVER model. Paid a measly 300 bucks eight years ago and gotten TWENTY-NINE updates for absolutely free. You do the math on what that works out to in terms of MONTHLY costs. That are of course getting LESS not MORE.
I'm PC-based, so it's a non-starter.
I've moved to ProRes capture on an Atomos Ninja V and ProRes timeline, it's plenty fast (when everything works fine). The issue is the bugs.
I think the correct form of the title should be “You Can Moan About Adobe BECAUSE the Company Is Making More Money Than Ever.” Essentially, their subscription model is a rip-off. Rather than selling you their software and offering you the chance to buy further upgrades, they insist you keep on paying, month after month.
I agree that it's a rip-off. That's why I'm paying them absolutely nothing each month. If they did upgrades like before, they would still be getting my money. This way they get zero.
I'm happy to say that Adobe is making absolutely zero money on me. Zero. Zip. Nada. Nuthin'. They can take their subscription and shove it.
Same here. They got my money for Photoshop CS6 and that was that. I used CC for a year but didn't renew it and haven't missed it. The minor amount of video work I do is completed with Hitfilm.
Well this article was rather fluffy
This.
The whiners are always the loudest. The fact of the matter is that the subscription model has led directly to more people using their products. In a few years don't be surprised to see most of their competitors doing the same. They will have to in order to compete on a real level.
This.
This.
You are factually incapable of writing ANYTHING else, right? Just a little lemming? And that for completely CONTRARY posts.
What benefits does signing up to the subscription model offer you? Versus, say, a one-off purchase and paying for upgrades only when you want them?
The biggest benefit for me is the constant development. At least in theory. I want the upgrades whenever they're available without having to purchase a new application in its entirety every few years.
However, what's more important is how it benefits the vendor. A constant development model with a much smaller development team and a constant roll out of upgrades is far more cost effective then development > market > release > maintenance/update development while working on the next major release in parallel (subsequent major releases may well likely be handled by a separate team all together, etc.) > market > major release > and the circle goes 'round and 'round.
The subscription model makes it financially more accessible for many users and, more importantly, much more convenient; something that, obviously, is popular based on the numbers of new users. Couple that with the substantial reduction in development costs for the vendor and it's pretty plain to me. Because of the new model, Adobe is able to cut costs of doing business while at the same time increase their user base.
That's why I believe that their competitors--if they want to compete at the same level--will most likely have to adopt a similar model.
I can see the sense of some of that.
However, I bought my current version of Lightroom - LR6 - on 4th March 2016. It cost £59 to buy outright. That means it's cost me the equivalent of £1.59 a month for the time I've had it. With every month that passes, the equivalent monthly cost falls and falls.
If I'd been on the £9.98 monthly subscription, I'd have spent £390 so far, and I'd still have to keep on paying for ever.
For me, the subscription model doesn't make getting Lightroom more accessible - it makes it seem a crazy idea
Well, yeah, the longer you keep something you purchase as a one time purchase the cheaper it gets. That goes for cars, houses, and software.
But the flip side to that is that you're not getting the product enhancements that may or may not be worth it to you. To me, and to a great many others, it's worth it. There are some very good features that I have access to on my subscription model that you don't have. The cost benefit for me (and a great many others) is well worth it. The cost of a subscription to be able to have this is far less than what the average coffee consumer pays for coffee in a year.
Plus, you're leaving out the fact that it includes PS.
Compare the cost of getting both LR and PS 5 years ago to an annual subscription. Simple math shows that i's more accessible to more people based on that. Crazy or not.
I haven't spent a dime on Adobe software since 2011.
Capture One + Affinity Photo + Final Cut Pro X works fine for me.
Here’s a list of my photography and video software purchases over the past 5 years:
May 21, 2015 - Apple Final Cut Pro X: $299.99
March 28, 2015 - Capture One Pro Upgrade: $30
August 26, 2016 - Capture One Pro Sony 10: $50
January 27, 2018 - Capture One Pro Sony 11 Upgrade: $62
March 10, 2019 - Capture One Pro Sony 12 Upgrade: $54
March 17, 2019: Serif Affinity Photo: $49.99
That’s a total of $545.98 -- less than the cost of one year of the Adobe Creative Cloud.
And Final Cut Pro X and Affinity Photo are one-time purchases. I don’t have to pay for future updates.
More on this:
https://www.onportraits.com/cloud-free/
This. I am avoiding all software subscriptions.
This.
This.
This this this, since that's all I'm capable of typing. Moron.
Not this.
While it's certainly true for Final Cut Pro X (as with ANY Apple app), there's absolutely no way you could know that to be true about Affinity. I'd be careful what I claim.
Thanks for the update, Chet.
This.
You're an idiot. Or a bot. Or, most likely, BOTH.
Not this.
"You can complain that it's too expensive, but they're getting rich !"
That utterly brilliant headline should ease the minds of those who were worried about Adobe.
Ridiculousness aside..
We know they had to lower their price to compete with everyone else. The people they picked up by doing so are those who were never going to pay $600+ for a program that even Adobe now says is worth what.. $5/mo? when paired with Lightroom. So at $10/mo anyone can rent it, and they of course have picked up a lot of soccer moms and 16 year old Instagram'ers along with some of those who just found it too expensive so they pirated it. Of course, Ps is still one of the more pirated editors out there, but surely some were ethical enough to sign contracts..... no ?!
Hopefully Adobe can look past all those locked-in commitments and appreciate their customers to the point of actually responding to support emails in a timely manner and fix the bugginess of updates.
While articles like this celebrate the rich company getting richer, we should all stop and realize that all those competitors out there, that everyone keeps talking about, are like 3 and 5 years old. Being constantly compared to, and often replacing a 30 year old program should really make Adobe wonder what these infant companies have that Adobe doesn't.
Other than perpetuity....
Making more money than ever? Good, that just proves they don't need to raise prices ever again since they're clearly doing more than fine with their current pricing structure. If they do, I will be happy to abandon them.
Affinity and Alien skin (prefer Alien skin) The question is .... can they both tweak their work areas as in access to the toolbars.. and in depth colors are a bit of..in some areas . ..nothing that they can not fix..
Adobe rate it at 2 stars..Slow and very ugly in terms of working with the software. They exacerbate the issues not fix them.....Just test and fix the updates...what works on you machines might not work on everyone's.
RIght now i am using C1 PRO (love it) -----> works great on my Mac
Alien skin is my next goto editing SW ----> works great on my Mac
Here is my specs maxed out
Model Name: MacBook Pro
Model Identifier: MacBookPro11,3
Processor Name: Intel Core i7
Processor Speed: 2.8 GHz
Number of Processors: 1
Total Number of Cores: 4
L2 Cache (per Core): 256 KB
L3 Cache: 6 MB
Hyper-Threading Technology: Enabled
Memory: 16 GB
Boot ROM Version: 153.0.0.0.0
SMC Version (system): 2.19f12
Hardware UUID: F61DF6ED-2708-5FD4-910E-5FFC353DD987
I'm OK with the subscription model for software, but I'm not OK with requiring people to pay for cloud storage when they introduced Lightroom Mobile... especially because they throw some storage in for free, but you know you're going to eventually fill it up and have to buy more.
When they changed of Lightroom CC to Lightroom Classic CC, and Lightroom Mobile to Lightroom CC, that was INCREDIBLY confusing to thousands of people who are now accidentally using Lightroom Mobile which (eventually) requires expensive cloud storage. Now they've changed the name to just "Lightroom" and it's hard to blame people when they use the wrong version.
"When they changed of Lightroom CC to Lightroom Classic CC, and Lightroom Mobile to Lightroom CC, that was INCREDIBLY confusing to thousands of people who are now accidentally using Lightroom Mobile which (eventually) requires expensive cloud storage. Now they've changed the name to just "Lightroom" and it's hard to blame people when they use the wrong version."
This naming scheme made no sense. Why not call Lightroom CC Lightroom Mobile and Lightroom Classic Lightroom CC? I cannot even guess at the reasons Adobe named them as they did.
Tony, you're OK with subscription software. But you're also OK with creating incredibly defamatory videos. The one about Steve McCurry was full of dumb mistakes and outright lies. Shame on you for producing such garbage. You're also OK with blocking criticism of your videos in the comments under them, so it looks as if you have nothing but support from commenters.
Adobe is much bigger than just photo editing, so I really don't see them changing models unless there is a huge upheaval in their subscriber base, and the fact that they're printing money suggests to me that they're not planning any big changes.
Personally, I think I'd have a hard time ditching them because I'm also using Premiere Pro, Illustrator, Acrobat, and InDesign. Jumping to another product for photo editing means I need to also learn alternatives for all of those. I can stomach the subscription model for now provided that the service is solid, but the biggest irritant for me has been when a tool changes how it functions without me knowing and all of a sudden I need to re-learn a tool quickly. That's a nuisance.
Photographers might want to consider leveraging this knowledge with an investment in Adobe stock. All the moaning (me included), hasn't done anything to reduce their continued rise in profitability.
I was smart and bought in back in 2014 but just glancing at my purchase from 2017 and it’s already up 100% in just two years. The original 2014 lots I bought are up 300%!
If you have the means to invest, you can easily pay for your subscription with the gains.
My subscription is up shortly. After reading all the replies I have to ask; does any of the alternatives do what can be done with the LR/PS subscription? I keep thinking that I should jump ship, but hesitate because 1, I'm very comfortable with LR and 2, from what I've seen no single program can duplicate LR/PS.
I bought Adobe stock a few years ago and it’s quickly become the best investment I’ve made. Over the last few months I’ve explored using other “adobe killer” software but always wind up coming back to their photo and video editors. That being said, I do get irritated when their software has bugs or elements that should have been update or repaired years ago still acts up the same way in new releases.
Not sure if this is clear to everyone, but the "creative" branch of Adobe products is not really responsible for this growth. It is their whole marketing and ad technology business that is going through the roof for a few years now. That's where Adobe is competing against the likes of Salesforce, Google (amongst others) and where they got a huge part of new business revenue generated over the years from the marketers and media agencies. The creative suite is still not rendered completely irrelevant, but significantly less important to the overall success of the business than it was even 5 years ago. And maybe that's also one of the issues with stalled development for Lightroom and/or Photoshop. It is just not really important any longer.
Companies and schools probably have signed contracts that they can't back out of just because of a sudden price increase. Increased price + locked in subscribers = profit