[Junction10]

Salisbury Wrote:Nik Software, Alienskin, OnOne et al have all been in business for yonks, so their user base is greater.  PP (IMHO) is unique, no other software I've used/am aware of, comes close.  If you want it, you'll pay for it.
It's still a damned sight cheaper than Adobe's creations, and it does the job quicker and better.

So .......... stop whingeing about how much it costs .......... if it does the job, faster and better than other software you have ......... PAY UP !!
(I am in no way affiliated or connected with Anthropics Technology ..... I'm just a satisfied user)

Well that's the thing isn't it?  It doesn't matter how long other companies have been in business or how big their user base is... The fact is, they don't charge almost twice the price of a version upgrade JUST to support 64 bit OS, and the fact that Anthropics hasn't been in business as long as Adobe doesn't mean that 64-bit pricing is justified or reasonable.

OnOne software products for example are priced at $159.95 - and they support 64 bit as standard.
Nik software plugins are priced at between $99 and $199 and support 64 bit as standard.

Portrait Professional Studio - Approx. $180 - and supports 32-bit only.
64 bit version? $267

So the other developers are actually cheaper, not priced more highly than Portrait Professional...

Now obviously, they're different products entirely so you can't compare the pricing on a 'like for like' basis... but they all support 64 bit as standard and most are all still cheaper than PP - despite Admin's claim to the contrary.... $87 difference between 32 and 64 bit support for a base licence??

I don't think the Portrait Professional (Studio) product is overpriced per se - it's a great product... but the '64 bit support' option I believe IS vastly over-priced, for saving a few seconds rendering time per image when you will be spending at least 5-10 minutes working on anyway....

I use a Canon 5D mk II and a 1DS Mk III which produce huge files...  and the 32bit version of Portrait Professional has no problem working with them...  
The program isn't one which is suited to batch processing either, so the time-saving benefits of 64bit support are negligible...  it just seems a weird price policy for something that isn't that much of a bonus...  and THAT is what I can't understand. I'm not criticising the price of the Studio version..  just wondering how the price of the 64 bit support can be justified.

I like Portrait Professional and already HAVE paid for it..  but I'm not so gullible as to pay nearly twice the cost of a version upgrade for when I'm not going to get any ROI.

Version 9 -> 10 brings many performance and feature enhancements for only £19.95.
Version 10 32bit -> v10 64 bit - £34.95...  and the benefits??  
a few seconds of processing time per image, which you'll spend a couple of minutes prepping anyway...  

That just doesn't seem logical to me.

Unless by 'very expensive cameras' you mean Hasselblad's etc, and not high end Canon D-SLR's - In which case, upgrading to 64 bit is still pointless for many?