Home | Blog | Software | Reviews and Features | Forum | Help | Donate | About us
topbanner_forum
  *

avatar image

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
  • September 24, 2016, 09:01:15 PM
  • Proudly celebrating 10 years online.
  • Donate now to become a lifetime supporting member of the site and get a non-expiring license key for all of our programs.
  • donate

Author Topic: Affinity (Serif) goes head to head with Photoshop & (maybe) Illustrator  (Read 1040 times)

tomos

  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • ***
  • Posts: 10,237
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
I'm just after signing up for the Affinity Window's beta programme.
https://affinity.ser...f.com/en-us/windows/

Affinity Photo (image editor)
Affinity Designer (Vector software)

I'll focus on Affinity Photo, as that's what I have the most info about (and it sounds the more promising of the two).
Affinity Photo:
from Serif, has been available on mac for over a year now. It aims to compete directly with Photoshop. They emphasise that their software is 50US$ which includes two years updates, in contrast to Photoshop which requires a subscription -- with Lightroom, 8 to 10US$/month (+taxes), depending on location.

All that's no good if it dont work. Here's what they promise:
https://affinity.serif.com/en-us/photo/
These days it's often difficult to get a simple list of features on websites... so, a video:
https://vimeo.com/132757806

Quotes from reviews of the mac version:
Quote
[..] running a Macbook Pro 15" with 16GB of RAM and a 1TB Hybrid Drive.
As a rough comparison, my Photoshop install typically takes between 45 seconds to 2 minutes to boot up and start running. Affinity Photo takes between 10-20 seconds.
//
Where Affinity really shines is its speed and price. It is definitely affordable, and its performance is spectacular. It is fast, well organized and has almost everything that most image editors might require on a daily basis. It has all of the brushes you need to get the job done, with a lot of customization features.
http://www.sitepoint...-photo-image-editor/
(March 10, 2015)

Quote
Overall, Affinity Photo is a fabulous program that really does rival the best professional and enthusiast-level image-editing packages on the market. It easily takes the lead over previous Serif programs that we've seen for PC, and is a worthy winner of Apple's 'Mac App of the Year' award, 2015.
http://www.techradar...photo-1295010/review

Sounds interesting.
Tom

Jibz

  • Developer
  • Joined in 2005
  • ***
  • Posts: 1,119
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Looks interesting, going to have to keep an eye on that.

I think it is hard to compete with Photoshop because it is such a kitchen sink.

wraith808

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • **
  • Posts: 8,266
  • "In my dreams, I always do it right."
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Looks interesting, going to have to keep an eye on that.

I think it is hard to compete with Photoshop because it is such a kitchen sink.

There is that, but I think it's simpler in scope, and harder to beat: They are the known name in the field.  Just like "you can't go wrong with Microsoft" was the mantra for a while, "you're not a real artist if you're not using Photoshop" is a real thing.

tomos

  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • ***
  • Posts: 10,237
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Looks interesting, going to have to keep an eye on that.

I think it is hard to compete with Photoshop because it is such a kitchen sink.

There is that, but I think it's simpler in scope, and harder to beat: They are the known name in the field.  Just like "you can't go wrong with Microsoft" was the mantra for a while, "you're not a real artist if you're not using Photoshop" is a real thing.

yeah, the Creative Suite is a bit like Office too. Plus Photoshop has all the fancy plugins etc etc. But who really needs all that, especially now: I suspect people that might have bought before think would twice about a subscription. Or they subscribe and realise they're not using it enough to justify the cost and cancel.

I guess it's partly because it's got the kitchen sink that's it's such a snail. But then I think that speed was never particularly important for Adobe. When I first started using vector programmes, Illustrator 8 was a snail in comparison to Freehand 9. I eventually bought ai CS4 and it was slower again.
Earlier versions of Photoshop were quite fast though. (I dont have experience with anything more recent than Photoshop CS2. For fine-tuning photographs I was happily using Photoshop 5.5 for over ten years -- combined with a select edges plugin, it was all I needed.)

I think there could be a very big market for almost-as-good-as-Photoshop software.
(I see Sagelight appears to be dead.)
Tom

Deozaan

  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • ***
  • Posts: 7,640
    • View Profile
    • The Blog of Deozaan
    • Read more about this member.
    • Donate to Member
But who really needs all that, especially now: I suspect people that might have bought before think would twice about a subscription. Or they subscribe and realise they're not using it enough to justify the cost and cancel.

Actually, I think it's the opposite. Before, Photoshop or the Creative Suite was something like $600. Now it's "only" $10 a month. That seems much more affordable to me, and I think many people agree with that and are actually paying for Photoshop now instead of just downloading a pirated version of it.

But that's just a hunch. I have no evidence to back that thought up with.


wraith808

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • **
  • Posts: 8,266
  • "In my dreams, I always do it right."
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
But who really needs all that, especially now: I suspect people that might have bought before think would twice about a subscription. Or they subscribe and realise they're not using it enough to justify the cost and cancel.

Actually, I think it's the opposite. Before, Photoshop or the Creative Suite was something like $600. Now it's "only" $10 a month. That seems much more affordable to me, and I think many people agree with that and are actually paying for Photoshop now instead of just downloading a pirated version of it.

But that's just a hunch. I have no evidence to back that thought up with.

Seems like the mindset I'd expect.  Before, we were using a lot older version of photoshop that we'd picked up at a student discount.  Now, $10 a month for the latest version means that we're on the newest version of photoshop at a pittance.

rjbull

  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2005
  • ***
  • default avatar
  • Posts: 2,919
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
I think there could be a very big market for almost-as-good-as-Photoshop software.
I thought that's what Elements was...  though my impression is that most photographers'  new first port of call is Lightroom, only turning to Photoshop or equivalent when they really need the extra features.

wraith808

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • **
  • Posts: 8,266
  • "In my dreams, I always do it right."
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
I think there could be a very big market for almost-as-good-as-Photoshop software.
I thought that's what Elements was...  though my impression is that most photographers'  new first port of call is Lightroom, only turning to Photoshop or equivalent when they really need the extra features.



Photoshop and Lightroom have totally different focuses.  I think a lot of people get that wrong.  This isn't to say that what you do in Lightroom you couldn't do in Photoshop- for the most part.  Lightroom does have some features that Photoshop will probably never have.  But where lightroom shines is working on them in bulk and seeing the results live and applying wholesale changes to a lot of images.  Photoshop is meant for making significant changes to a photo by using a vast array of tools.  Lightroom is meant for very quickly organizing your entire library of photos and making the most common edits to them quickly.

A very good breakdown on that: https://photographyl...otoshop-vs-lightroom

So I think that is a fallacy that one is a substitute for the other.