Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 ... 18 19 [20]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: If Thomas designed a new Photoshop for photographers now...  (Read 43259 times)
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 8040



WWW
« Reply #380 on: December 23, 2013, 08:45:24 PM »
ReplyReply

Who said the subscription models are required? Many photographers will never sign up for the subscription model. But if Adobe offered the new Photoshop (Photoshop Lightroom Pro?) on perpetual basis like LR, many CC subscribers would switch to it.
Who said? Adobe. And why would they build a new PS like product without a subscription? To dilute these who they want to suscribe to CC? Makes no sense.
Logged

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

Posts: 379


WWW
« Reply #381 on: December 23, 2013, 10:26:01 PM »
ReplyReply

Well, if Adobe won't cannibalize some of their products, somebody else will.
Logged

chez
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 302


« Reply #382 on: December 24, 2013, 07:18:24 AM »
ReplyReply

Well, if Adobe won't cannibalize some of their products, somebody else will.

The last 20 years disagrees with your statements. Lots of half ass attempts, but nothing close. I sure wouldn't invest into a product that is here today, gone to tomorrow.
Logged
Torbjörn Tapani
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 40


Re:
« Reply #383 on: December 24, 2013, 09:52:30 AM »
ReplyReply

Beating Adobe on their own turf might not be possible. But if you change the game...
Logged
Stephane Desnault
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 65


« Reply #384 on: January 06, 2014, 06:34:20 AM »
ReplyReply

For photographers, I imagine more something like a "Lightroom Super Plus"... Specifically I'd love to have Lightroom PLUS the following that are in Photoshop:

- Layers
- Advanced selections
- Advanced pixel editing (liquify...)
- Advanced HDR creation (REAL HDR, not tonemapped images)
- Advanced 32bit and HDR manipulations, ie. being able to manage colors and light outside the tonemapped universe (cf. the HDRI Handbook 2.0)

And on top of that, I'd also want:

- Facial recognition (à la Google/Picasa) for easy keywording
- The color management and grading controls available in SpeedGrade CC - they are way above what PS and LR offer
Logged
Stephane Desnault
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 65


« Reply #385 on: January 06, 2014, 07:21:45 AM »
ReplyReply

I forgot two things in the list above:

- Intelligent skin editing controls: Advanced color rendering and selection across skin colors, maybe even linked to facial recognition.
- White balance and tonality controls centered around skin color, for easy, fast and essential color grading.

(can you tell I'm often shooting events and portraits in available light  Smiley ?)

« Last Edit: January 06, 2014, 07:23:21 AM by Stephane Desnault » Logged
StephaneB
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 60


WWW
« Reply #386 on: January 08, 2014, 03:24:50 PM »
ReplyReply

Gimp3

For example:

-- Smart filters versus dumb filters


First time I read Gimp 3 was to be released soon was around 2001...

It is funny to see people criticizing Photoshop for having both "dumb" adjustment layers and smart filters and then promoting a program that has neither Smiley
Logged


Stéphane

My Webpage

LKaven
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 772


« Reply #387 on: January 08, 2014, 06:22:26 PM »
ReplyReply

First time I read Gimp 3 was to be released soon was around 2001...

It is funny to see people criticizing Photoshop for having both "dumb" adjustment layers and smart filters and then promoting a program that has neither Smiley

1) Nice try.
2) Reminder about thread topic again, about designing something new.
3) The technology exists and is proven in production.  Nuke. 
4) Whether you'll ever get it is partly up to you.
Logged

KatManDEW
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 54


« Reply #388 on: January 20, 2014, 07:23:19 AM »
ReplyReply

While talking about commercials there’s another area which needs to change in New PS. It's time to decouple raw support from the main program. It’s a ridiculous situation when ACR is made deliberately incompatible with old versions of LR & PS so that you have to buy a new version of LR or PS just because you bought a new camera. It should be possible to upgrade just the ACR module for a small price (compared to the price for full LR), with everything else being compatible.  For Adobe there will be an income stream from selling new Raw modules and photographers will be happier as their old software will still be usable (for a small fee) with a new camera.

Late to the party myself... I'm in 100% agreement with you here, and "obik" in reply #11 in this thread. I find this very infurating.

Without some radical new FUNCTIONAL, photography specific additions to LR/PS (not just bells and whistles), I can't imagine me ever needing anything more than what is provided in LR and PS now. I will not upgrade to CC just to get raw capability for my next new camera. I positively will move to something else. I am willing to pay for ACR upgrades, but will not pay monthly extortion simply to maintain raw capability with new cameras.

I'm still using LR 4.4 because with the exception of improved spot removal in LR 5, I see no FUNCTIONAL improvments in LR5. Just bells and whistles. For the few times I need to "straighten" an image, I can do that just fine in LR 4.4. I don't need a dumbed down automatic feature for that, and an upgrade price to go with it.

In my opinion, and that of many folks I know personally, most all software, including operating systems, have hit a functional improvement dead end. Except for compatability with new hardware (cameras, more system memory, larger hard discs, higher resolution displays), what more can new software packages really provide, except bells and whistles? Pretty animated icons, Aero desktops? Touch screen capability for my large expensive calibrated workstation display?

Developers have hit a functional dead end, so they are looking at a rental model to provide future revenue.
Logged
LKaven
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 772


« Reply #389 on: January 20, 2014, 10:41:32 AM »
ReplyReply

In my opinion, and that of many folks I know personally, most all software, including operating systems, have hit a functional improvement dead end. Except for compatability with new hardware (cameras, more system memory, larger hard discs, higher resolution displays), what more can new software packages really provide, except bells and whistles? Pretty animated icons, Aero desktops? Touch screen capability for my large expensive calibrated workstation display?

Developers have hit a functional dead end, so they are looking at a rental model to provide future revenue.

You're right when it comes to Adobe.  Adobe has always favored putting its resources into aggressive business strategies to squeeze continued royalties out of their aging designs, over new technical innovation. 

But I would not say that most all software has hit a functional improvement dead end.  Many new things are possible, as we've discussed earlier in this thread.  But economic barriers to entry are high, especially in so-called "mature" product categories. 

Selling deeply entrenched but obsolete products is made easier by the fact that users have the least understanding of the scope of possibilities for their tools.
Logged

Lightsmith
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 101


« Reply #390 on: February 04, 2014, 06:24:54 PM »
ReplyReply

The software industry has escaped the attention of the FTC. Adobe has bought out its primary competitors on three occasions with the last being Macromedia with its Freehand and Flash products. Adobe kills the product and customers have no choice but to go with Adobe. I have been left in the lurch three times and each time my old work product is not longer compatible with the Adobe replacement so my libraries become worthless for future work.

I also have to work with companies overseas and they are often two or three rev levels back on Illustrator and Indesign and so increasingly I farm work out so I don't have to maintain multiple versions as Adobe has stopped making it possible to do a save as and have the work compatible with a prior release of the application.

Where I live in Monterey, CA I cannot get DSL much less broadband so the Cloud is not an option. Even if it was I know after 25 years of working with computer technology not to have all my work dependent upon both a wired connection and to having a companies servers operational 24x7. When Adobe has glitches with new code and people cannot bring up applications then the work being done for clients comes to a screeching halt.

Check the Adobe forums and read the many comments where people cannot access their Cloud subscription and are unable to work.

I have the latest Photoshop, Illustrator, InDesign for my company's computers but that will be the end of it. We are not moving to the Cloud to further enrich the greedy buggers at Adobe and this is all about the money. Fortunately with Nikon I have their image processing tools and RAW converter to fall back on so worst case I can save files as TIFF and open them in CS6. There was nothing really all that valuable in terms of new releases of Photoshop after CS4 that is not done better with third party applications.
Logged
LesPalenik
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 379


WWW
« Reply #391 on: February 05, 2014, 02:53:52 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Check the Adobe forums and read the many comments where people cannot access their Cloud subscription and are unable to work.

This is frightening.
Is it possible to have on the same computer PS CS5 / CS6 alongside PS CC, and run one or the other?
Or would there be a conflict having both PS versions on the same computer?

Logged

Schewe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5255


WWW
« Reply #392 on: February 05, 2014, 03:05:45 AM »
ReplyReply

This is frightening.
Is it possible to have on the same computer PS CS5 / CS6 alongside PS CC, and run one or the other?
Or would there be a conflict having both PS versions on the same computer?

I have CS 5.5, CS6 and CC all installed and running on Mac OS 10.7.5. (can't say that CS 5.x works the same way but I suspect it does).
Logged
sniper
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 571


« Reply #393 on: February 05, 2014, 04:33:24 AM »
ReplyReply

Who said? Adobe. And why would they build a new PS like product without a subscription? To dilute these who they want to suscribe to CC? Makes no sense.
In what way does making another slimed down version of photoshop thats not elements or lightoom make sense? If the full photoshop is selling so well on CC why is there a need for another version?  Lets face it between photoshop/lightroom/elements it's already pretty well covered.
Logged
Rick Popham
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 111


WWW
« Reply #394 on: February 05, 2014, 07:38:17 AM »
ReplyReply

This is frightening.
Is it possible to have on the same computer PS CS5 / CS6 alongside PS CC, and run one or the other?
Or would there be a conflict having both PS versions on the same computer?



Yes, I have PS CS6 running with PS CC (trying the Photography Bundle) on my Windows machine (8.1). If you use Lightroom, it will default to using CC as the editor, and you'll have to set CS6 as a secondary editor.
Logged
Pages: « 1 ... 18 19 [20]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad