Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 9 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Michael's take on Adobe CC  (Read 18733 times)
MarkM
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 336



WWW
« Reply #40 on: May 09, 2013, 11:31:54 PM »
ReplyReply

What point is there in comparing the language of an online photo storage and marketing service with the terms of a ubiquitous, near monopoly digital content creation suite that no longer offers perpetual licenses?  

You mentioned the trivial nature of the monthly cost as being a non-issue for you earlier.  Does nothing about putting your work in the hands of a company that has no practical competition worry you, even a little bit?  You truly have no concerns about what they might do to change the terms in five or ten years, once they have established a irreversible dependency that you are unable to break?

My point was, that despite the shock displayed by that article, these terms of service are neither unusual nor shocking. You'll find similar language with all software and services.

Exactly what kind of agreement do you think they should write? "We will never change our terms of service" "We guarantee this service will be around until the sun explodes" Doesn't every company on earth have terms that reserve the right to change them?

Whatever dependency I may have in the future I already have now. These tool are integral to my business. I have to stay up to date with them. If something better comes along, or I have to switch it doesn't make much difference whether it's the creative cloud or perpetual license. Switching will be painful either way. It's true with my camera gear too.It was true moving from film to digital.


Logged

Isaac
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3053


« Reply #41 on: May 10, 2013, 12:09:57 AM »
ReplyReply

Or will layers be added to Lightroom? ... What do I do with my .psd files?

Photoshop Elements / Creating layers

.PSD File and Photoshop Elements


Any hope for CS6 Light that is aimed at photographers and not graphics professionals?

"Adobe® Photoshop® Elements 11 — the #1 selling consumer photo editing software"

« Last Edit: May 10, 2013, 12:21:56 AM by Isaac » Logged
Dave (Isle of Skye)
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1073


Don't mistake lack of talent for genius.


WWW
« Reply #42 on: May 10, 2013, 05:47:13 AM »
ReplyReply

You know I was thinking about this last night, and I actually think the issue is far bigger than corporate Vs amateur user, or perpetual Vs rented licensing etc. I think this will affect the WHOLE photography and camera market around the world, from camera sales, computer sales and laptops, external storage etc, right through to book sales and website advertising revenues.

Lets imagine some time in the not to far distant future, I already own a camera such as the 5d Mk III, I am running CS6 (which is now no longer supported by Adobe) and I don't want/can't afford to sign up to the cloud, as I am a small business or amateur photographer and need to keep costs to a minimum.

Canon then releases the 5D Mk IV, which has a couple more mega pixels of photo sites on the sensor and a few more bells and whistles added, as they did last time from Mk II to the Mk III. But what may have been an obvious upgrade route to me, has now become a dilemma, because as I already own a camera in the Mk III that works with CS6 just how I want it to and with my preferred workflow and I am happy with the situation, or I can forego all that and choose to buy the new Canon and try to find a fudged way around to accessing every single image that I create on it, as that upgrade will necessitate a complete change to my preferred workflow or the cost of buying into the cloud and all that entails - so the choice boils down to this - do I upgrade to the new camera, or do I stick with what I have already got, for both camera, software, computer system and manuals, guides and plug-ins etc?

I would most likely stick with what I have got and Canon loses a sale, as well as all the small businesses and training companies and book sellers and software developers etc., as do the computer manufacturers and O/S developers, that I would have also spent money with and who rely on me upgrading my camera and computer system and plug-ins every few years or so, they have all now lost sales.

Fair enough, I know that at some point in the future when something that cannot be replaced has broken, that I would be forced into some kind of an upgrade, but assuming the above scenario is correct, this would be postponed until I absolutely had to and not before.

I think this scenario is not going to be far from reality for many thousands of photographers around the world and as such, Adobe are going to put quite a few people out of business with this move, so even though it may be good for them, in the long run, a significant section of the smaller associated businesses will surely suffer.

Dave
« Last Edit: May 10, 2013, 05:50:01 AM by Dave (Isle of Skye) » Logged

Fine Art Photography on the Misty Isle of Skye
http://www.photography.info
BartvanderWolf
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3910


« Reply #43 on: May 10, 2013, 06:07:16 AM »
ReplyReply

"Adobe® Photoshop® Elements 11 — the #1 selling consumer photo editing software"

It came preinstalled on my Dell laptop, unavoidable, I never used it.
Also, don't forget; There are lies, damned lies, and statistics.

Cheers,
Bart
Logged
Alan Goldhammer
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1739


WWW
« Reply #44 on: May 10, 2013, 06:33:09 AM »
ReplyReply


"Adobe® Photoshop® Elements 11 — the #1 selling consumer photo editing software"


When I first made the move to digital some years ago, I started off with Elements (I forget which version # it was).  Isn't the major question that WE should all be asking is whether Elements will be upgraded to include the PS features that we all regularly use and that it is coupled seamlessly with LR.  There are so many PS things (and I do own PS CS6) that I will never use and yes it is a bloated piece of software.  There are some editing tools and approaches that are better handled by PS than LR which I suspect is why there is so much outrage from the photography community.  An expressed commitment to improving Elements would probably satisfy the vast majority of the advanced amateur and semi-professional photographers.

I'm totally agnostic about Adobe's decision.  They are a corporation and the primary responsibility is to the shareholders.  Obviously dissatisfied customers will impact a company's bottom line but I cannot see much of that happening here.  The far greater impact is on all the third parties who develop software add ons or training and education programs.  If the user base shrinks these folks will be looking for another line of work.
Logged

Zeitz
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 18


« Reply #45 on: May 10, 2013, 07:01:12 AM »
ReplyReply

So I understand from the response that layers won't be added to Lightroom.  Will Elements to linked to Lightroom the way CS is linked to Lightroom?
Logged
Ken Richmond
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 70


WWW
« Reply #46 on: May 10, 2013, 07:15:48 AM »
ReplyReply

"...Exactly what kind of agreement do you think they should write? "We will never change our terms of service" "We guarantee this service will be around until the sun explodes" Doesn't every company on earth have terms that reserve the right to change them?"

Are you kidding here?  The agreement they should write is: #1  "We agree that we will meet the expectations and reliability as set forth and created by our advertising."   #2.  We agree, and have stipulated to the US Federal Trade Commision and in the Federal District Courts of California that we have monopoly control over graphics software worldwide and like any public utility, we voluntarily submit our pricing schedule and business practices to the FTC for review of the industry wide negative impact our monopolistic enterprise might have on society as a whole."

For the second time I see the bland acceptance of the "click through" waivers that software purchasers have to acknowledge before using software as though that somehow established a standard of acceptable conduct.  Get it right, the industry does not establish it's own "acceptable practices" or it's own "standard of care" for the performance.

I would not be the least surprised that Mr. David Bois, Esq. has already dispatched the legal grunts and is assembling coherts with funds sufficient to undertake a class action.  Adobe has created a watershed moment that, up until now, lacked a large enough class, and sufficient reward to break up the graphics monopoly.  Just because you were made to agree to the non negotiable harsh terms, and lacked financial resources to challenge software companies that imposed them, doesn't mean that they cannot be challenged.  You read it and were discouraged by the language and the potential costs.  But if you want, I can list the jurisdictions/states where Adobe's warranty is void ab initio.  For the CC one must agree to the warranty terms before the purchase. In New York, warranty waivers after the sale are not enforced.  Other states listed below have various requirements for consumer sales that restrict sellers from disclaiming suitability for the purpose it was sold for.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uniform/ucc.html#a2

Thanks,

Ken Richmond
« Last Edit: May 10, 2013, 08:38:05 AM by Ken Richmond » Logged

jrsforums
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 750


« Reply #47 on: May 10, 2013, 07:18:59 AM »
ReplyReply

PS Elements

I must admit, I have only spent about "30 seconds" playing in Elements 11. 

However, my takeaway was that the bulk of it only worked in 8bit mode.  Did I miss something?  Can you fully process 16bit tiffs?

John
Logged

John
bjanes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2882



« Reply #48 on: May 10, 2013, 07:37:28 AM »
ReplyReply

The point to me is not the cost. It's the fact that you're basically locked in.

Maybe so, but not going with the cloud means being locked out. If I choose not to renew the subscription, the question is, "Do you prefer to be locked out now or later?"

Bill
Logged
sniper
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 599


« Reply #49 on: May 10, 2013, 07:42:14 AM »
ReplyReply

If photoshop is aimed at graphic designers rather than photographers why are almost all the updates and improvments photography related?
Logged
ButchM
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 188


« Reply #50 on: May 10, 2013, 07:55:05 AM »
ReplyReply

If photoshop is aimed at graphic designers rather than photographers why are almost all the updates and improvments photography related?

Indeed ... I recently watched Terry Whites "My 5 Favorite New Features in Photoshop CC" video (actually he shared 6 items) four of his favorites were in Camera RAW ... only two were actual Ps only features ... Does a graphic artist really need ACR?

Of the two in Ps were the Camera Shake tool ... why would a professional graphic designer (or even worse a professional photographer) want to waste time with an image that suffered from camera shake? I sorta take pride in the fact that I invest as much care during the capture phase so I don't introduce camera shake ... after all that's what I get paid for ... Terry's other fav Ps CC feature was the new scaling tool where you could take a low res image and upscale it so it would print better ... that's a great feature for stealing all those images off the web and making them better for printing ... Adobe just made pirating their client's works even easier ... sounds like a win-win for everyone ... After looking around at these wonderful new "features" ... I'm not quite so disappointed if I don't board the perpetual merry-go-round rental scheme ...
Logged
s4e
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 38


« Reply #51 on: May 10, 2013, 08:13:23 AM »
ReplyReply

You know I was thinking about this last night, and I actually think the issue is far bigger than corporate Vs amateur user, or perpetual Vs rented licensing etc. I think this will affect the WHOLE photography and camera market around the world, from camera sales, computer sales and laptops, external storage etc, right through to book sales and website advertising revenues.

Lets imagine some time in the not to far distant future, I already own a camera such as the 5d Mk III, I am running CS6 (which is now no longer supported by Adobe) and I don't want/can't afford to sign up to the cloud, as I am a small business or amateur photographer and need to keep costs to a minimum.

Canon then releases the 5D Mk IV, which has a couple more mega pixels of photo sites on the sensor and a few more bells and whistles added, as they did last time from Mk II to the Mk III. But what may have been an obvious upgrade route to me, has now become a dilemma, because as I already own a camera in the Mk III that works with CS6 just how I want it to and with my preferred workflow and I am happy with the situation, or I can forego all that and choose to buy the new Canon and try to find a fudged way around to accessing every single image that I create on it, as that upgrade will necessitate a complete change to my preferred workflow or the cost of buying into the cloud and all that entails - so the choice boils down to this - do I upgrade to the new camera, or do I stick with what I have already got, for both camera, software, computer system and manuals, guides and plug-ins etc?

I would most likely stick with what I have got and Canon loses a sale, as well as all the small businesses and training companies and book sellers and software developers etc., as do the computer manufacturers and O/S developers, that I would have also spent money with and who rely on me upgrading my camera and computer system and plug-ins every few years or so, they have all now lost sales.

Fair enough, I know that at some point in the future when something that cannot be replaced has broken, that I would be forced into some kind of an upgrade, but assuming the above scenario is correct, this would be postponed until I absolutely had to and not before.

I think this scenario is not going to be far from reality for many thousands of photographers around the world and as such, Adobe are going to put quite a few people out of business with this move, so even though it may be good for them, in the long run, a significant section of the smaller associated businesses will surely suffer.

Dave


With a new camera you can use DNG converter (and getting more locked into Adobe). A bigger problem is new OS versions - no options there...
Logged
tom60634
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 8


« Reply #52 on: May 10, 2013, 08:18:34 AM »
ReplyReply

It isn't a question of my "buying into" anything. To my knowledge Adobe has never specifically targeted amateurs. They've been willing to sell to them, but they are not its target market for this product.

Adobe appears to be willing to sacrifice the non-pro market, and I seriously doubt that at this point they'll back-track. I could be wrong.

Michael

As a registered owner of Photoshop since CS2, I wish I had archived all the email marketing and sales messages that adobe had directed towards my in-box.
 
As a matter of fact the only reason I invested in Photoshop was an offer that was hard to resist i.e. as a registered owner of Photoshop Elements adobe allowed me to purchase Photoshop at Photoshop's upgrade price. I then joined NAPP and received an additional 15-20% (can't remember the exact percentage) NAPP discount on top of adobe's offer. I dutifully purchased each incremental upgrade up till CS6.

I have eventually become  adept using Photoshop and some of its non-adobe plugins. I personally feel insulted regarding the way adobe lied (yes it was a lie) about the future upgrade policy. CS6 was going to be the first upgrade that I would have skipped since it didn't offer any essential upgrades to CS5, but I upgraded to keep my options open if CS7 offered some must have features.
Adobe betrayed my trust.
I can't say that I'll ever respond to any of their marketing ploys again. I have started unsubscribing to every email that touts any adobe product, I won't renew my membership to the NAPP.
That's my vote regarding adobe's cloud rental scheme.
Logged
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9316



WWW
« Reply #53 on: May 10, 2013, 08:34:04 AM »
ReplyReply

Why can't folks like us commit to a 1-2 year CC subscription with the understanding that, at the end of the 1 or 2 year commitment, whatever we've "rented" we keep?

For the same reason that no matter how many times you rent a car from Budget, you don't get to keep it.

CC is a subscription. What about the subscription model isn't clear here? It isn't a lease to own. It isn't an anything to own (which is what upsets people and that's understandable).
Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9316



WWW
« Reply #54 on: May 10, 2013, 08:35:24 AM »
ReplyReply

With a new camera you can use DNG converter (and getting more locked into Adobe).

That statements might be true if only Adobe software dealt with DNG but that's not the case.
Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
BartvanderWolf
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3910


« Reply #55 on: May 10, 2013, 08:40:09 AM »
ReplyReply

For the same reason that no matter how many times you rent a car from Budget, you don't get to keep it.

If you paid say 10+% of the purchase price each time, you probably would ... Wink

Cheers,
Bart
Logged
Ben Rubinstein
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1733


« Reply #56 on: May 10, 2013, 08:50:47 AM »
ReplyReply

How big of a problem is the operating system lock in? I'm using CS6 on XP64 bit and it works on XP fine. You can even make a small change in the registry to allow GPU. Assuming that Windows 7 will last as long as XP did and given the fiasco with Win 8, probably will do, are we not talking about 5-7 years until this begins to be a problem? Longer even if windows is as backwards compatible as it is today. We should be able to use CS6 for 'photoshop' type stuff for over 5 years (and I doubt that any upgrades will be that missed) by which time there will be a viable alternative. Raw processing will just have to migrate to a more trustworthy company in the meantime.
« Last Edit: May 10, 2013, 08:53:59 AM by Ben Rubinstein » Logged

Ben Rubinstein
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1733


« Reply #57 on: May 10, 2013, 08:51:52 AM »
ReplyReply

When you lease a car you a) get a huge choice of cars to lease b) get a buy out option at the end.
Logged

digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9316



WWW
« Reply #58 on: May 10, 2013, 08:57:55 AM »
ReplyReply

If you paid say 10+% of the purchase price each time, you probably would ... Wink

I don't think so. There's no reason Budget would or should do this, just like Adobe. The price you pay to rent or subscribe to something doesn't and never did guarantee you don't have to return the product when the subscription or rent is over. Doesn't matter if renting that car 2 times paid for the price, if you're dumb enough or rich enough to spend that kind of money, fine. There's a model here. It doesn't deviate unless both parties agree and the party that own the item to rent falls into the label or winner of "the golden rule".

Adobe can setup any model at any price they wish. What we consumers do is a different story.

Now Rent to Own is a different model and one I think could work here since I seriously doubt Adobe is going to back down on a subscription model. They could allow someone who rents (subscribes) to CC for a minimum of 1 year to buy out that version (locked, no updates) for what I suspect would be a pretty high fee. Like $20 per month for 12 months then buy out at $699. Now before you say "but Andrew, that's a lot more money than just buying Photoshop today" and you'd be right, Adobe isn't going to change anything to end up where they were before the CC debacle in terms of generating the same amount of cash. A buy out would at least give people an end point and option for a perceptual license and, if they want to get back onto the subscription train, they start over again at $20 per month for one year plus.
Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
jrsforums
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 750


« Reply #59 on: May 10, 2013, 09:03:11 AM »
ReplyReply

For the same reason that no matter how many times you rent a car from Budget, you don't get to keep it.

CC is a subscription. What about the subscription model isn't clear here? It isn't a lease to own. It isn't an anything to own (which is what upsets people and that's understandable).

POOR ANALOGY.

A car from Avis or Hertz will provide the same result if Budget is not available.
Logged

John
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 9 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad