Photoshop purchase?

[Ande]

Thanks again Heather.  That’s not a bad idea 🙂. As soon as I get some free time I’ll have a session.  I’m not quite in a position to gather any data yet, so have a little time on my side.

[varius21]

I got the whole creative cloud plan for ALL CC programs for around £52 a year I believe it was on G2A or a site like that. I’m happy with that

[ollypenrice]

12 hours ago, Ande said:

Apologies to everyone who has chipped in for not replying sooner. I have driven about 250 miles today, some of that through very unsavoury weather. I finally got home exhausted, and have only just perked up, lol.

Thanks for the many suggestions for alternatives to Photoshop. Ordinarily, I would be very receptive to trying a different product. However, I have just received a book for Xmas, Dark Art or Magic Bullet by Steve Richards. What I hadn’t realised when I requested it, is that it is totally centred around a Photoshop workflow, and all instructions are PS specific.  Because I’m a total beginner with imaging, and all of its related software, I really need to follow the book parrot fashion. I have neither the knowledge or experience to be able to transpose the commands into alternative packages that probably use different terminology. 
 

Regarding Photoshop CS2, is it a Photoshop lite type of thing? And does it contain everything necessary for imaging, or are there holes that need workarounds?

I use CS3. It's fine for AP. I'm not aware of any significant missing pieces and the key plug ins (notably Gradient Xterminator and Noel's Actions, AKA Pro Digital Astronomy Tools, work fine.) I don't think CS2 is very different. At least one famous DS imager was still using it last time we were in contact and I have felt no need whatever to modernize my version.

The key things I do outside Ps are:

Dynamic Background Extraction in Pixinsight. (Grad X for Ps is a good substitute.)

SCNR Green also in PI. There is an alternative available for free or donation on Rogelio Bernal Andreo's Deep Sky Colors site. (Hasta La Vista Green.)

Resizing, composite imaging and mosaic making in Registar.

Starnet++ star removal. Mine operates within PI but I believe it can be standalone. It is a powerful alternative to star masking for star reduction. (My star masking method appears in Steve's book. Fame! 😄)  More seriously, the book is first class.

Olly

PS To answer Heather's question on Ps Elements, alas it is not remotely adequate for our purposes.

Edited December 29, 2020 by ollypenrice

[Luke]

Ande, I can see your logic going for Photoshop, there are so many tutorials and books out there for it.

I loved using it for 20 years but am out of work now and not a fan of subscription models, so I switched to the free GIMP. It took a little while to get used to it, but I don't miss Photoshop now.

It works with some Photoshop plugins I used regularly anyway, and there is a neat plugin that works native on it called G'Mic, which has a whole bunch of useful tools including several sharpening tools.

But as up top, PS may be your best option for easing in. But GIMP is very capable too. I can't comment on other options, but there is life beyond PS! Good luck on your imaging journey!

Edited December 29, 2020 by Luke

[Ande]

43 minutes ago, ollypenrice said:

I use CS3. It's fine for AP. I'm not aware of any significant missing pieces and the key plug ins (notably Gradient Xterminator and Noel's Actions, AKA Pro Digital Astronomy Tools, work fine.) I don't think CS2 is very different. At least one famous DS imager was still using it last time we were in contact and I have felt no need whatever to modernize my version.

The key things I do outside Ps are:

Dynamic Background Extraction in Pixinsight. (Grad X for Ps is a good substitute.)

SCNR Green also in PI. There is an alternative available for free or donation on Rogelio Bernal Andreo's Deep Sky Colors site. (Hasta La Vista Green.)

Resizing, composite imaging and mosaic making in Registar.

Starnet++ star removal. Mine operates within PI but I believe it can be standalone. It is a powerful alternative to star masking for star reduction. (My star masking method appears in Steve's book. Fame! 😄)  More seriously, the book is first class.

Olly

PS To answer Heather's question on Ps Elements, alas it is not remotely adequate for our purposes.

Thanks for clearing up the PS Elements query Olly. I can now wipe that from the list. I shall have a good look into CS3.  Regarding the rest of your workflow, that is hellishly confusing from a beginner’s standpoint.  With that many programs, each completing their own little corner of the puzzle, my head would implode with all the back and forth of the data and images. I need to try and keep things under one umbrella as much as is possible. That’s what I am hoping the ASIAIR Pro will largely do for me at the image collection stage of the proceedings. 
 

It’s a shame there isn’t one, all encompassing package that could take you right through from polar alignment to final image without compromise, and the need to keep sourcing out to other programs.  I’d be first in the queue to snap that up 😀

[kirkster501]

11 hours ago, varius21 said:

I got the whole creative cloud plan for ALL CC programs for around £52 a year I believe it was on G2A or a site like that. I’m happy with that

When it comes to renewal contact them on chat, plead poverty and that you need to cancel if they can't make it more attractive and they will drop it to £20-£25 or so. I got away with that for 3 years until they did me a deal for £40 that I refused so dropped back to photography plan with Lightroom, Ps and Xd for 9.99 per month - which is peanuts.  I now do video with DV Resolve for free.

[Ande]

5 minutes ago, Luke said:

Ande, I can see your logic going for Photoshop, there are so many tutorials and books out there for it.

I loved using it for 20 years but am out of work now and not a fan of subscription models, so I switched to the free GIMP. It took a little while to get used to it, but I don't miss Photoshop now.

It works with some Photoshop plugins I used regularly anyway, and there is a neat plugin that works native on it called G'Mic, which has a whole bunch of useful tools including several sharpening tools.

But as up top, PS may be your best option for easing in. But GIMP is very capable too. I can't comment on other options, but there is life beyond PS! Good luck on your imaging journey!

Thanks @Luke

I may yet have a peep at the free offerings, and see if I can wrap my feeble brain around some of the concepts. However, as I said earlier, my main tether is Steve Richards’ book, which I shall be following. I need to keep the cliff face as shallow as possible, and, unfortunately, that seems to point at Photoshop. 
 

Just out of curiosity, are there any publications out there that are geared up around any of the free/cheaper packages? Books similar to that of Steve’s? Or, failing that, a good YouTube tutorial that is squarely aimed at muppets like me? I have looked at many YouTube offerings and usually fall by the wayside with some of the concepts and/or terminology. I’m sure much of that will pass though, once I get my hands dirty so to speak. 

[ollypenrice]

6 minutes ago, Ande said:

Thanks for clearing up the PS Elements query Olly. I can now wipe that from the list. I shall have a good look into CS3.  Regarding the rest of your workflow, that is hellishly confusing from a beginner’s standpoint.  With that many programs, each completing their own little corner of the puzzle, my head would implode with all the back and forth of the data and images. I need to try and keep things under one umbrella as much as is possible. That’s what I am hoping the ASIAIR Pro will largely do for me at the image collection stage of the proceedings. 
 

It’s a shame there isn’t one, all encompassing package that could take you right through from polar alignment to final image without compromise, and the need to keep sourcing out to other programs.  I’d be first in the queue to snap that up 😀

That's exactly what I felt when I started. You get used to flitting back and forth, though. In reality I do just gradient removal and SCNR green to the linear data in PI and then all the rest is Ps.

Gradient removal really is important, though. Gradient Xterminator is pretty good.

As you get involved with processing you'll want to get as close to perfection as you can but, at first, a simple stretch and setting of the black point will give you a picture which you'll probably find wonderful just as it is. We all enjoy different aspects of AP to different extents. My favourite part is post-processing so I have a big box of tricks in that domain but a basic picture isn't too hard to produce. Above all, have fun.

Olly

 

[rickwayne]

PixInsight versus Photoshop: Even within the astrophotography domain, these are tools peerless in their own little realms, rather stumble-footed outside it. Even beyond the very considerable difference in ease of learning and ease of use (not the same thing), one is at heart a program for manipulating data scientifically, and the other is for editing and polishing visual images.

Oversimplifying a bit, processing an astro image (should) involve four overall steps: calibration, integration, stretching, and the fiddly bits. 🙂

Because we enhance the contrast in weak signals so dramatically, problems tend to be magnified along with the image. Calibration is a process of compensating for known, predictable problems with the sensor (dark current, thermal glow, hot or cold pixels) and the imaging train (dust, vignetting). Astro software takes this in stride; Photoshop has essentially no tools for it.

Integration is the mathematical process of averaging each pixel's value from a "stack" of (putatively) identical frames. Photoshop can provide this, in fairly cack-handed fashion (either a simple mean or a simple median calculation); astro software has all manner of sophisticated tools to optimize the process (e.g. outlier rejection to eliminate Elon's little contribution to our hobby) pretty transparently to the user.

Stretching is contrast enhancement, specifically mapping tones which are very close together at the dim end onto a much broader and brighter range, without blowing out the brightest tones. Astro software has built-in tools for this but Photoshop can do a very nice job. Before stretching, astro-heads refer to  the  image as "linear" data; "nonlinear" afterwards.

The fiddly bits: Overall editing to create an image pleasing to the artist. Localized brightening or darkening. Context-aware patching of artifacts. Emphasizing some parts of the image while toning down others, for dramatic effect. Photoshop is hands-down nolo-contendre the class of the world at this, with a comprehensive array of tools that have been relentlessly honed by a large company for 32  years to be both effective and intuitive to use. There are purists who insist that scientific integrity demands that we not "lie" with our data in this fashion; indeed, that's basically the philosophy behind PixInsight. That's a perfectly valid position. For the rest of us...

Of course it's a little more complicated than that. (Is gradient removal a "fiddly bit"? After all, it should be done on linear data.) But the general shape of the problem is valid, I assert. Astro tools are better at linear data, arguably easier to use for stretching, and Photoshop simply blows them away for artistic image editing.

Now, PI is the most complete set of tools I know of, but IMO handing it to a beginner is akin to saying "If you're a real astrophotographer, you should prove it by climbing this cliff. Here's your blindfold and mittens." The core functions are available and, I'd argue, more accessible in other software. Astro Pixel Processor springs to mind, but Deep Sky Stacker, Photoshop, and a couple of plugins will certainly do the job. SiriL wins no points for the obviousness of its user interface but it's perfectly straightforward, and it's free.

All of which is to say, Ande, that understanding the process is the real key, and while any of these software stacks will help you establish an initial workflow, simpler is probably better to start.

[Ande]

@rickwayne Once again, a big thank you. And sorry for not responding sooner. Although I had time to read your post yesterday, I didn’t have sufficient time to pen a reply.

I like the way that you have divided the process up nice and neatly for me. Outlying the concepts, and the likely strongest contender for each stage. Although not necessarily the easiest tool for that particular job. I guess until I actually get my hands dirty, I won’t really know which tools I’m capable of wielding.

I think I shall just have to take things one step at a time, beginning with data/image acquisition, and then into Deep Sky Stacker. I guess, at this stage, those are the only two absolutes that I shall have. From there on it will simply  be a case of what piece of software  my little brain is capable of using. 
 

I have looked at trying to purchase PS CS3, but even that simple step seems to involve entering the murky world of eBay resellers. No actual retailers seem to sell it. I saw one link for £500, but that seemed crazily expensive for old software. Unless I’m just totally naive as to the cost of this stuff.  I need to sit down with more time on my hands and have a proper root about.

[TerryMcK]

On 28/12/2020 at 13:22, ollypenrice said:

someone who gets on with Ps may not get on with PI. I speak from experience!

A 45 day trial is not sufficient time to properly evaluate PixInsight. I don't know if you bought it or not. I appreciate life gets in the way sometimes and one cannot always get to grips with a complex program in that period of time. I use both PS and PI finding them both easy to use. PS I use professionally, have done for years, was trained in it and as a general purpose tool it is excellent. Affinity Photo is almost, if not, as good (IMHO). 

PI is a recent addition for me and I decided to take training courses in it to make the most of the modest initial outlay - a good way to spend evenings in UK lockdown! The live courses (via GotoMeeting) are given by Warren Keller and Ron Brecher who are both excellent teachers - mastersofpixinsight.com - have been invaluable. Rather than just relying upon books, random internet workflow PDFs or anonymous talking heads on Youtube videos I decided to learn it properly. Yes I agree that the interface is unusual but you soon get used to it. Have you looked at AstroPixelProcessor? An equally odd looking interface but fantastic program. As is NINA with its odd interface but excellent results. 

• So if anybody is considering PixInsight have a look at Warren and Ron's website to factor in some online training as well as the initial outlay.
• If you are struggling finding a used version of Photoshop PS3 then download Affinity Photo. It is really cheap and the interface is the same as Photoshop. Some plugins work on it too like Topaz DeNoise, Gradient Exterminator and HVLG.
• If you want a free general purpose image editing program then GIMP is a multiplatform tool that is similar to Photoshop
• But for £9.99 per month you can get the latest version of Photoshop - some people baulk at the cost as if you carry on paying for it for 10 years then that is thickest part of £1200 and you never own it. That could have been a couple of AstroDon's

So 230 Euros for PixInsight, written by AstroPhotographers for AstroPhotographers, starts to look a little more tempting as it includes lifetime updates and feature enhancements. Hence why I bought it.

An interesting debate.

[ollypenrice]

9 minutes ago, TerryMcK said:

A 45 day trial is not sufficient time to properly evaluate PixInsight. I don't know if you bought it or not. I appreciate life gets in the way sometimes and one cannot always get to grips with a complex program in that period of time. I use both PS and PI finding them both easy to use. PS I use professionally, have done for years, was trained in it and as a general purpose tool it is excellent. Affinity Photo is almost, if not, as good (IMHO). 

PI is a recent addition for me and I decided to take training courses in it to make the most of the modest initial outlay - a good way to spend evenings in UK lockdown! The live courses (via GotoMeeting) are given by Warren Keller and Ron Brecher who are both excellent teachers - mastersofpixinsight.com - have been invaluable. Rather than just relying upon books, random internet workflow PDFs or anonymous talking heads on Youtube videos I decided to learn it properly. Yes I agree that the interface is unusual but you soon get used to it. Have you looked at AstroPixelProcessor? An equally odd looking interface but fantastic program. As is NINA with its odd interface but excellent results. 

• So if anybody is considering PixInsight have a look at Warren and Ron's website to factor in some online training as well as the initial outlay.
• If you are struggling finding a used version of Photoshop PS3 then download Affinity Photo. It is really cheap and the interface is the same as Photoshop. Some plugins work on it too like Topaz DeNoise, Gradient Exterminator and HVLG.
• If you want a free general purpose image editing program then GIMP is a multiplatform tool that is similar to Photoshop
• But for £9.99 per month you can get the latest version of Photoshop - some people baulk at the cost as if you carry on paying for it for 10 years then that is thickest part of £1200 and you never own it. That could have been a couple of AstroDon's

So 230 Euros for PixInsight, written by AstroPhotographers for AstroPhotographers, starts to look a little more tempting as it includes lifetime updates and feature enhancements. Hence why I bought it.

An interesting debate.

Very interesting on Affinity Photo. That may be good news for the OP and others.

I bought PI a long time ago and also Warren's book. I even reviewed his CDs for Astronomy Now. There's no doubt that PI is a powerful tool but it's not its difficulty which makes me prefer Ps for most things, it's the very nature of the way the user operates within it. I cannot imagine processing without layers.  (Someone quoted RBA earlier on in the thread as agreeing that the layers method is a significant absence in PI.) In my workflow layers are, well,  everything. I'll even import a PI modification into Ps and use it as a layer! (Bigamy!!🤣)

I think any beginner should look at APP for sure. I initially joined the Beta team but we were so busy here at the time that I just ran out of hours in the day. It's a very good program from a very good guy. Ironically I've just finished a magazine article in which it gets honorable mention over this project:  https://www.astrobin.com/g82xf7/B/?nc=user  The original imager built up a mosaic in APP, automating the construction. The image geometry was sound but it was patchy and unevenly lit. I was asked to see if I could fix it so I did so in my usual Registar-and-Photoshop workflow but using the APP image as a geometric template. It was a far from automated process with each individual stitching checked by hand and fixed where necessary in levels, using the equalize adjustment to search for splicing errors.  I don't doubt the rebuild could have been done in other programs but I just used the ones I know. (I very much doubt that any program can automate a 32 panel astrophoto though.)

This is a very good thread. Thanks to the OP.

Olly

[The Admiral]

3 hours ago, Ande said:

I think I shall just have to take things one step at a time

I think you would be correct in taking one step at a time. I know that I might be castigated by the purists for what I am about to say, but I think it would be helpful to get some perspective on what you are trying to do, and not obsess about any particular piece of software. At least, not until you have had some practical experience of astro image processing. Rick has given you a broad outline of what steps the processing is about, so that is a good start. As said before, other than Pixinsight, Astro Pixel Processor, Maxim DL or AstroArt, (others?), no one piece of software can do it all, even those who use the complete set of PI tools still probably 'polish' their images in some different software. They all have their different paradigms, quirks and idiosyncracies, and each take some learning and familiarisation. Some have an impenetrable manual, or perhaps none! Or just don't suit your way of working. The fact is, it is a long road to acquire the 'art' of processing astro images, but you shouldn't let that put you off. But take it a bit at a time and develop your skills. You will learn what software fits your way of doing things. You can download much of the software with a free trial period which is very useful, but I recommend you getting some experience before doing that otherwise you will be all at sea when confronted by it. I couldn't get on with PI .

In my own case I started using the free calibration and stacking software, DSS, though ultimately moved on to AstroArt to do that as it accepted my particular camera files without prior conversion. Also, have a look at Star Tools. Virtually all my processing to date has used it. It does the processing but not the calibration and stacking, is remarkably effective in getting a good looking image, and is quite cheap, but it does have an operating paradigm rather different to others and it may not suit. But, at least it would be a good cheap introduction. More akin to Photoshop is Affinity Photo, very powerful yet very sensibly priced, especially if you get it during one of their frequent offers. In my view there is no point in spending a fortune on software until you know what you want and what works for you. And you won't know that until you have a bit of experience.

Good luck with your endeavors.

Ian

[Ande]

35 minutes ago, The Admiral said:

I think you would be correct in taking one step at a time. I know that I might be castigated by the purists for what I am about to say, but I think it would be helpful to get some perspective on what you are trying to do, and not obsess about any particular piece of software. At least, not until you have had some practical experience of astro image processing. Rick has given you a broad outline of what steps the processing is about, so that is a good start. As said before, other than Pixinsight, Astro Pixel Processor, Maxim DL or AstroArt, (others?), no one piece of software can do it all, even those who use the complete set of PI tools still probably 'polish' their images in some different software. They all have their different paradigms, quirks and idiosyncracies, and each take some learning and familiarisation. Some have an impenetrable manual, or perhaps none! Or just don't suit your way of working. The fact is, it is a long road to acquire the 'art' of processing astro images, but you shouldn't let that put you off. But take it a bit at a time and develop your skills. You will learn what software fits your way of doing things. You can download much of the software with a free trial period which is very useful, but I recommend you getting some experience before doing that otherwise you will be all at sea when confronted by it. I couldn't get on with PI .

In my own case I started using the free calibration and stacking software, DSS, though ultimately moved on to AstroArt to do that as it accepted my particular camera files without prior conversion. Also, have a look at Star Tools. Virtually all my processing to date has used it. It does the processing but not the calibration and stacking, is remarkably effective in getting a good looking image, and is quite cheap, but it does have an operating paradigm rather different to others and it may not suit. But, at least it would be a good cheap introduction. More akin to Photoshop is Affinity Photo, very powerful yet very sensibly priced, especially if you get it during one of their frequent offers. In my view there is no point in spending a fortune on software until you know what you want and what works for you. And you won't know that until you have a bit of experience.

Good luck with your endeavors.

Ian

@The Admiral

Thanks Ian

Yes, I think you’ve hit the nail on the head there. I don’t really know what I need or what will work for me until I have some experience. And I will struggle to gain the experience without using something or other, irrespective of whether it’s a good fit for me or not. I guess it’s a mountain I need to climb in order to get a good view of what’s the best route going forward.

I have an ASIair Pro on order, and, from my limited understanding, I gather it is capable of handling a fair chunk of the early workload. I’ve got DSS downloaded onto my laptop in readiness, but if the ASIair can make that redundant for no loss in quality then that’ll be a step towards a simpler workflow.  I think that once I know where it’s limitations lie, or, more specifically, where my limitations lie using it, and what work still needs to be done once the ASIair has done it’s best, then I’ll have a reasonably good idea of what holes still need filling.

Luckily, I have the luxury of a little time on my side, thanks to zero stocks and having to wait for my equipment orders to be fulfilled. I can use this time to have a sampling session of the free stuff that’s on offer, and see if anything seems right. And, if no joy, then look harder at the paid for products.  I shall certainly look into Affinity Photo along the way, as it seems to garner quite a bit of love amongst many of you.

[The Admiral]

17 minutes ago, Ande said:

but if the ASIair can make that redundant for no loss in quality

I don't know how competent or flexible the stacking software is on the ASIair, but I would suggest that you get familiar with the way DSS works as a first stage, otherwise you won't know what you are missing! It is often useful to be able to stack using something called Kappa-Sigma clipping which is very useful in removing satellite trails. Does the ASIair offer this option?

I suppose I tend to be a bit of a purist in that I'd rather have the original data on my PC than have it pre-baked by the capture software first. At least I can treat in my own way, and have the option to repeat any processing if I'm not happy. Also, you will need to take darks, dark flats, and flat exposures to work in to your calibration, which DSS (or other calibration/stacking software) uses.

Ian

Edited December 31, 2020 by The Admiral

[nephilim]

28 minutes ago, The Admiral said:

I don't know how competent or flexible the stacking software is on the ASIair, but I would suggest that you get familiar with the way DSS works as a first stage, otherwise you won't know what you are missing! It is often useful to be able to stack using something called Kappa-Sigma clipping which is very useful in removing satellite trails. Does the ASIair offer this option?

I suppose I tend to be a bit of a purist in that I'd rather have the original data on my PC than have it pre-baked by the capture software first. At least I can treat in my own way, and have the option to repeat any processing if I'm not happy. Also, you will need to take darks, dark flats, and flat exposures to work in to your calibration, which DSS (or other calibration/stacking software) uses.

Ian

Won't the dithering option using ASIairs guiding software get rid of  satellite trails. You can also do calibration frames with it aswell.

Edited December 31, 2020 by nephilim

[teoria_del_big_bang]

20 minutes ago, nephilim said:

Won't the dithering option using ASIairs guiding software get rid of  satellite trails. You can also do calibration frames with it aswell.

No, I wouldn't think so, dithering will help with hot and cold pixels as they will be on the same pixels each frame but the image will be shifted slightly so when stacked, which aligns a large percentage of the stars on each frame,, the hot and cold pixels will not line up. But the sat trails will be in the same place, with respect to the stars, and so when stacked will also line up on each frame same as the stars will. 
But, Kappa-Sigma clipping will.

I think because the trails are not in every frame they do tend to get dimmer as the stack gets bigger but if in an area of the sky prone to many satellites then almost half the frames can have sat trails in somewhere, and so it is good practice to use a stacking algorithm (if thats the right phrase) to get rid of them altogether such as Kappa-Sigma clipping.

I think that's right anyway - that is my understanding anyway but could be mistaken.

Steve

Edited December 31, 2020 by teoria_del_big_bang

[Ande]

1 hour ago, The Admiral said:

I don't know how competent or flexible the stacking software is on the ASIair, but I would suggest that you get familiar with the way DSS works as a first stage, otherwise you won't know what you are missing! It is often useful to be able to stack using something called Kappa-Sigma clipping which is very useful in removing satellite trails. Does the ASIair offer this option?

I suppose I tend to be a bit of a purist in that I'd rather have the original data on my PC than have it pre-baked by the capture software first. At least I can treat in my own way, and have the option to repeat any processing if I'm not happy. Also, you will need to take darks, dark flats, and flat exposures to work in to your calibration, which DSS (or other calibration/stacking software) uses.

Ian

I really don’t know about the Kappa-Sigma clipping. That’s yet another variable thrown into the mix of which I know nothing. I guess necessity will force me to come to terms with all of these unknowns come the glorious day. 

[Alien 13]

I am an Affinity Photo user now but still have PS CS6 which cost an arm and a leg back in the day, I gave up on PS purely for its lack of RAW support on the latest Canon cameras.

Looking at the current monthly subscriptions for PS I would say its a bargain, I would imagine PS would cost £1-2K if bought outright but could be out of date within 6-7 years.

Alan

[malc-c]

On 28/12/2020 at 15:05, BrendanC said:

That's strange, I have it installed on a PC and 2 laptops, all Windows 10, different vendors, spec etc, and I don't have that problem. 

I to have CS2 installed on Windows 10 - never had an issue with it.  It even accepted the astronomy tools plug in !

It suits my level of image tweaking

[Starflyer]

If all you'll use PS for is astroimaging then go the CS2 route, although I don't agree with the posts saying Adobe are giving it away free.  Things may have changed since they originally made it available for download and provided the licence key on their site.  They did this as they had to retire the old CS2 licence server, if you used the key it was on the proviso that you already owned that version.  AFAIK they never gave it away and it's technically illegal for you to use it without having purchased it in the past.  I may be wrong of course, but this is how it was originally and a lot of sites at the time, wrongly,  publicised it as being free.

I'm apposed to subscription software, however I do pay for PS now.  It's not expensive, compared to the many hundreds of pounds they used to charge for it, and I always have access to the latest version.  If you do any other photography and won't miss the price of a couple of beers a month then go for the subscription.

[Ande]

I must admit that I am drawn more towards purchasing Affinity Photo. At £50 to own it outright, it seems the more attractive of the options. If I can subscribe to Photoshop for just 1 or 2 months, without having to commit to a longer plan, then I may just do so. Just so that I can follow the aforementioned book to the letter until I have a better notion of what I’m doing.

[Davey-T]

2 minutes ago, Ande said:

I must admit that I am drawn more towards purchasing Affinity Photo. At £50 to own it outright, it seems the more attractive of the options. If I can subscribe to Photoshop for just 1 or 2 months, without having to commit to a longer plan, then I may just do so. Just so that I can follow the aforementioned book to the letter until I have a better notion of what I’m doing.

Affinity have reduced price offers every so often, you've just missed one that was half price I think.

Dave

[Ande]

Just now, Davey-T said:

Affinity have reduced price offers every so often, you've just missed one that was half price I think.

Dave

Cheers @Davey-T I’m in no hurry, as I’m waiting for equipment which could be weeks or months. I’ll keep an eye out for a future offer

[Macdonald Daniel]

happy-kat, Not all people know how to use Affinity photo or PaintShopPro. I only know how to use Photoshop.