Question to lhodaniel2:
Can you still use Photoshop and Lightroom if you stop paying the $120?
Can you still use the Topaz products if you don’t pay for the upgrade?
And did Adobe give a discount to the buyers who always bought the upgrades well in advance?
These are purely rhetorical questions and everyone knows the answers.
At Adobe, you only pay to use the software, which is a software rental.
This is honestly a payment model that deserves the same fuss.
And many users didn’t go along with that back then either, and are sitting on their software today because new cameras are no longer supported.
With this I don’t want to question the performance of the software, which is certainly excellent, but for me the two products would never cover everything, especially not Photoshop.
And basically, I would like to say to all critics once again that apples are compared to oranges here.
According to the milkmaid calculation with the two Adobe products, any - but really any - shareware and any update would definitely be too expensive for programs with fewer functions.
One must always look at the ratio of the number of buyers/users to the effort required to create the software. Programming the software is not cheaper just because fewer people use it. Of course Photoshop is much more complex, but that’s why more people buy it.
Comparably complex programs with fewer users often cost 4-digit amounts.
And I would assume that this ratio is even much higher for Adobe than for the Topaz products. Adobe has millions of users and makes pretty good profits every year, the software should be much cheaper!
Also DxO Photolab certainly has significantly more buyers and subscribers than the Topaz products, but the above mentioned ratio is probably similar. The Nik Collection is probably bought less and is therefore more expensive in proportion (new and existing features, convenience).
And a niche product like the Topaz software may of course always cost a bit more if its features are outstanding and unrivaled in the market.
This was certainly the case with Topaz for a while now, but these unique selling points can of course disappear at some point. DeepPrime is probably only the beginning. Topaz has to come up with something, even if DeepPrime does not support all camera models.
And that is of course a good thing, because the users usually profit from the competition.
And now I repeat myself:
For long-term users, Topaz should have come up with a different model. I understand the annoyance.