Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 5 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Adobe's Briefing slides at Adobe MAX  (Read 6184 times)
Schewe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5253


WWW
« Reply #20 on: May 21, 2013, 04:59:27 PM »
ReplyReply

If colleges and universities quit teaching PS, Indesign, etc., and opt to present courses based on less costly and more "open source" alternatives, it will breed a whole new generation of professionals that simply have no loyalty to Adobe's pro software offerings.

Colleges and universities are obligated to prepare students for professional careers...unless the pros quit using Adobe pro apps, I don't see how colleges and universities can quite teaching Adobe pro apps. I also know that Adobe EDU is working very hard with colleges and universities to institute special edu programs that make it easier for colleges and universities to deploy Adobe pro apps and monthly pricing for students. For example, the entire CC is available for students & teachers for $29.99 vs $49.99 for individual pricing. There's currently a special price of the entire CC for $19.99 (although that runs out June 25th).

Adobe is pretty proactive in working with colleges and universities and have recently launched a new program for education called the Education Enterprise Agreement (EEA). This program will allow term access to the Creative Cloud desktop applications that are essential for faculty, staff and students and is available through authorized channel resellers.

So, I don't think the edu CC will be a weakness that leads to less students entering the marketplace trained to use Adobe pro apps.
Logged
Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4998



WWW
« Reply #21 on: May 21, 2013, 05:22:42 PM »
ReplyReply

Look, I am among the ones that complain, I too want to keep the status quo (read: upgrade every second cycle), I hate Adobe for what they are doing, etc.

I am just pointing out the inevitable, that after the dust settles, most of us will adapt to the new reality, and that's what Adobe is counting on.

Who is to say that, if the subscription models succeeds, everyone won't switch to it ultimately? Microsoft, Google, Nik, Apple, etc. Shrink-wrapped software and perpetual licenses might go the way of floppy disks, betamax video and CD music. We will kick and scream along the way, but how many people do you see today with a Walkman?

To put things into a perspective, my housing association is currently forcing me to fork out close to $4K for deck maintenance on my modest townhouse (advertised at purchase as "maintenance free"). That comes to about $500 per year. I can assure you that Photoshop provides much more pleasure in my life than the damn deck.
« Last Edit: May 21, 2013, 05:28:55 PM by Slobodan Blagojevic » Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
ButchM
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 126


« Reply #22 on: May 21, 2013, 05:40:37 PM »
ReplyReply

Look, I am among the ones that complain, I too want to keep the status quo (read: upgrade every second cycle), I hate Adobe for what they are doing, etc.

I am just pointing out the inevitable, that after the dust settles, most of us will adapt to the new reality, and that's what Adobe is counting on.

Who is to say that, if the subscription models succeeds, everyone won't switch to it ultimately? Microsoft, Google, Nik, Apple, etc. Shrink-wrapped software and perpetual licenses might go the way of floppy disks, betamax video and CD music. We will kick and scream along the way, but how many people do you see today with a Walkman?

Who is to say if the corporate entities you reference may also go the route of AOL, Yahoo, et al (those who were once the envy of the world and are either gone or only shadows of their former selves) ... who were once the movers and shakers of the industry that made grave errors in judgement that cost them far more than they expected?

No single entity is so perfect in their execution of concept that they are without weakness. Sure, today Adobe is the top dog in the "creative pro" options for software ... but I firmly believe that their actions over the past two years has sent a signal to some very hard working, energetic developers that the door is ajar just far enough to gain a foothold to make the effort worthwhile. There is a huge slice of the pie available for the asking, if a competitor can offer an alternative solution ... even if a few folks do sign up for CC in the interim ... if a viable option presents itself ... there would be little Adobe could do to force users to stay (after all, CC subscribers have no equity involved, only a monthly stipend they are compelled to turn over) ... If the grass is ever discovered to be greener elsewhere ... it would be quite easy to abandon their CC subscription.
Logged
Isaac
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2319


« Reply #23 on: May 21, 2013, 05:48:09 PM »
ReplyReply

Who is to say that, if the subscription models succeeds, everyone won't switch to it ultimately? Microsoft, Google, Nik, Apple, etc.

"Microsoft is now offering a consumer version of its Office 365 service, which turns the suite from a shrinkwrapped product you pay for in one lump sum into a subscription service."

Time, Jan. 30, 2013 - Should You Subscribe to Microsoft Office 365?
Logged
BartvanderWolf
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3007


« Reply #24 on: May 21, 2013, 05:59:38 PM »
ReplyReply

"Microsoft is now offering a consumer version of its Office 365 service, which turns the suite from a shrinkwrapped product you pay for in one lump sum into a subscription service."

And the article continues with "And as you’ll see if you visit Office.com, it’s emphasizing this new Office-as-a-service over the conventional versions. (They remain available, although Microsoft has done away with previous versions that entitled you to install the suite on more than one computer.)"

Cheers,
Bart
Logged
jrsforums
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 705


« Reply #25 on: May 21, 2013, 06:02:21 PM »
ReplyReply

And the article continues with "And as you’ll see if you visit Office.com, it’s emphasizing this new Office-as-a-service over the conventional versions. (They remain available, although Microsoft has done away with previous versions that entitled you to install the suite on more than one computer.)"

Cheers,
Bart

Always nice to have complete, rather than partial, info....Thanks, Bart
Logged

John
Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4998



WWW
« Reply #26 on: May 21, 2013, 06:05:23 PM »
ReplyReply

... the conventional versions. (They remain available...

The same thing Adobe was claiming, until yesterday Wink
Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
BartvanderWolf
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3007


« Reply #27 on: May 21, 2013, 06:17:40 PM »
ReplyReply

The same thing Adobe was claiming, until yesterday Wink

Hi Slobodan,

While that is correct, Microsoft have also said they anticipate offering perpetual use licenses for the next ten years. That's 'slightly' less alarming than pulling all perpetual licensed products overnight, wouldn't you say?

Cheers,
Bart
Logged
Isaac
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2319


« Reply #28 on: May 21, 2013, 09:12:27 PM »
ReplyReply

Always nice to have complete, rather than partial, info....Thanks, Bart

That is why I provided the link to the article when I posted that quote.
Logged
Rhossydd
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1862


WWW
« Reply #29 on: May 22, 2013, 02:40:01 AM »
ReplyReply

Colleges and universities are obligated to prepare students for professional careers...unless the pros quit using Adobe pro apps, I don't see how colleges and universities can quite teaching Adobe pro apps.
Two problems there.
1. Colleges and Universities often teach the subjects, not the software. You can learn digital imaging, DTP, vector based illustration, video editing etc. with packages other than Adobe's.
2. Funding. If Adobe charge too much, educational institutions simply won't be able to afford them. The pressures on cutting spending in Europe are immense. Plus if students see that they'll immediately have to subscribe to CC as soon as they leave college, other alternatives will be more appealing. One key selling point for CS in the past has been that if you buy it as a student you can keep using it after the course has finished, often for years without needing further expenditure.
Logged
Schewe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5253


WWW
« Reply #30 on: May 22, 2013, 02:53:32 AM »
ReplyReply

Two problems there.
1. Colleges and Universities often teach the subjects, not the software. You can learn digital imaging, DTP, vector based illustration, video editing etc. with packages other than Adobe's.

Uh...ok...so you are saying students would be fine learning digital imaging using GIMP? Really?]

Quote
2. Funding. If Adobe charge too much, educational institutions simply won't be able to afford them. The pressures on cutting spending in Europe are immense. Plus if students see that they'll immediately have to subscribe to CC as soon as they leave college, other alternatives will be more appealing. One key selling point for CS in the past has been that if you buy it as a student you can keep using it after the course has finished, often for years without needing further expenditure.

Other alternatives like what? GIMP? Hey, GIMP is free...wonder why it hasn't gotten very far? I mean, it's really cheap...

Sounds hollow bud...but you go with it...
Logged
Rhossydd
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1862


WWW
« Reply #31 on: May 22, 2013, 03:07:22 AM »
ReplyReply

Other alternatives like what? GIMP?
Don't be so silly as suggesting digital imaging is either Photoshop CC or The Gimp.

There's an awful lot of fundamentals that other products do just as well.
Logged
Schewe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5253


WWW
« Reply #32 on: May 22, 2013, 03:14:50 AM »
ReplyReply

There's an awful lot of fundamentals that other products do just as well.

Like what? Exactly what would a college or university choose to teach instead of Photoshop? I'm actually curious.
Logged
Rhossydd
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1862


WWW
« Reply #33 on: May 22, 2013, 03:34:25 AM »
ReplyReply

Like what? Exactly what would a college or university choose to teach instead of Photoshop? I'm actually curious.
Your question fails to understand that there's a difference between teaching the subject basics (that can learnt on any capable software) and teaching a specific product.

Colleges often need to teach The REAL basics.
Understanding things like levels, curves, understanding hue/saturation/luminance, what a layer is, what transparency means, what a mask is, how to use a mask, understanding selections etc...

It's all basic and obvious stuff to the cognoscenti here, but there a lot of students who start with embarrassingly little knowledge.

You don't need Photoshop CC to teach all this.
Logged
Schewe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5253


WWW
« Reply #34 on: May 22, 2013, 03:49:05 AM »
ReplyReply

You don't need Photoshop CC to teach all this.

When was the last time you talked to any photo or graphic artist students? I had time to talk with a variety at a recent PSE (Society of Photo Educators) conference here in Chicago a couple of months ago (way before the CC announcement). All the students I talked to were all about learning Lightroom and Photoshop. I seriously doubt any of the colleges and universities could get away with teaching digital imaging with anything the kids thought was lame (and anything not Photoshop or Lightroom is lame).

So, what apps could a college or university possible teach that the students would NOT smell copout? (understand that in general, the students are better informed and more advanced than their instructors–which is the biggest problem right now in photo edu).

Sorry, I think you are talking through your hat here.
« Last Edit: May 22, 2013, 03:51:41 AM by Schewe » Logged
Morris Taub
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 363



WWW
« Reply #35 on: May 22, 2013, 04:36:11 AM »
ReplyReply

Your question fails to understand that there's a difference between teaching the subject basics (that can learnt on any capable software) and teaching a specific product.

Colleges often need to teach The REAL basics.
Understanding things like levels, curves, understanding hue/saturation/luminance, what a layer is, what transparency means, what a mask is, how to use a mask, understanding selections etc...

It's all basic and obvious stuff to the cognoscenti here, but there a lot of students who start with embarrassingly little knowledge.

You don't need Photoshop CC to teach all this.

Rhossydd...I agree with Jeff here...I mean I understand what you're saying, but students who look forward to a career working for and with companies who do image manipulation need to know how photoshop and adobe products work. This is all tied to preparing files for indesign or dreamweaver, etc. Knowing how to make files compatible for print as well. Much of the pro print industry is married to photoshop. I've never been to a printer where their pre-press operation wasn't photoshop compatible, where they didn't or couldn't work with Indesign or Illustrator files.

It's why there's this debate goin' on now. Adobe Photoshop and many Adobe programs have been the standard and accepted for over twenty years. Wish it wasn't so, but those are the facts.

Logged

Rhossydd
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1862


WWW
« Reply #36 on: May 22, 2013, 04:43:06 AM »
ReplyReply

When was the last time you talked to any photo or graphic artist students?
About half an hour ago.
My daughter fairly recently completed A level photography at our local sixth form college (that's aged 16-18).

Nothing in the field of digital photography she was taught needed Photoshop.

Quote
Sorry, I think you are talking through your hat here.
No, just real experience helping someone for two years through her course. Plus seeing all the other 'students' at other courses I've attended over the years.

Maybe you can say what's so unique in Photoshop CC that is absolutely vital to understanding digital photography ?

Yes, it might well be the 'industry standard' at the moment, but pricing it out of non-commercial user's budgets may in the long term change that.
Logged
Rhossydd
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1862


WWW
« Reply #37 on: May 22, 2013, 04:48:04 AM »
ReplyReply

but students who look forward to a career working for and with companies who do image manipulation need to know how photoshop and adobe products work.
Not every photography course is directly targeted at long term careers in the industry. It's those more general courses that will look closely at whether using the expensive industrial heavyweight product is best for their particular curriculum.
We already see office software being taught with Open Office instead of MS Office, maybe something similar will happen with imaging products too.
Logged
Schewe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5253


WWW
« Reply #38 on: May 22, 2013, 05:05:24 AM »
ReplyReply

Maybe you can say what's so unique in Photoshop CC that is absolutely vital to understanding digital photography ?

Nothing about Photoshop CC per se (since it hasn't even shipped yet) but I'm talking Adobe pro level apps for college students hoping to get a job in the industry (and I'm talking college, not high school level) you know, students that want to get a real job after graduation...
Logged
Morris Taub
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 363



WWW
« Reply #39 on: May 22, 2013, 05:08:29 AM »
ReplyReply

Not every photography course is directly targeted at long term careers in the industry. It's those more general courses that will look closely at whether using the expensive industrial heavyweight product is best for their particular curriculum.
We already see office software being taught with Open Office instead of MS Office, maybe something similar will happen with imaging products too.

yes, I agree with you here. I mean even speaking of my own work, printing at home, or sending a file to a pro print shop, I don't need a photoshop file. I've used myriad types of software for various things.

But when compatibility becomes an issue, when you're full time or freelance working with or for a designer or art director, choices about software become limited. The industry standards can't be ignored. I'd say a student should be taught the basics of photoshop and a few other programs as well. Why not? Learning how to do similar things in a number of programs isn't a bad thing.

I do hope in a few years this isn't the case. But today, it's what's for breakfast. Art directors and in-house art departments don't usually have the time to waste adapting 'other' types of files to their work flow. They could, they might, but the more compatible you are with a client the better.
Logged

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

Ad
Ad
Ad