Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 2 3 [4] 5 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Adobe's Briefing slides at Adobe MAX  (Read 7949 times)
yaredna
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 49


« Reply #60 on: May 23, 2013, 12:49:10 PM »
ReplyReply

Few years ago, résumés used to include a reference to "experienced Lotus 1-2-3" or "experienced "Word Perfect". Schools used to teach dactylo typing too.

Wake up, Guys. Adobe kicked its own nest, and awoke the beast. Now there will be solid alternatives to aphotoshop popping up, and increasing in features /value : Acorn, Pixelmator, Paintshop Pro, Photoline, Gimp (despite what a guy called eschew thinks).

Adobe is replacing the stickiness factor of a perpetual license, with the desire for perpetual revenues. They'll get what they brgained for... Or not!
Logged
Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6880


WWW
« Reply #61 on: May 23, 2013, 12:54:44 PM »
ReplyReply

Depends how you define "frills" and "fundamentally". But that's beside the point, because it's still the perception of a good deal that makes people sign up, despite the bad odour of subscription.

Yes John, but the main point I was trying to make is that if you have a perpetual Office license to a recent version (recent being anything in the last ten years) and you don't want to subscribe for the future, or you do subscribe, create a bunch of documents and then decide to end it, because MSFT has been very attentive to backward compatibility and because the changes are not monumental from release to release, you are probably not at the same potential level of risk to the usability of your future documents created under the rental scheme as perhaps you could be (remains to be seen) with an Adobe rental scheme for Photoshop. And MS has made the cost very tolerable, and provided for five seats, and still allows you to buy an indefinite license for one seat. So as a package, the risk perception and the cost is arguably more consumer-friendly than what Adobe is doing.
Logged

Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml
Alan Goldhammer
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1616


WWW
« Reply #62 on: May 23, 2013, 01:11:08 PM »
ReplyReply

The other thing about MS Office is that the alternative freeware office suites are generally compatible with Office files.  The big exception of course are the templates which are likely to be proprietary to Office but if one is not a big user of them it's not a big deal to change.  I thought about Open Office for a while but then all my old work is with MS Office and my clients are as well.  As a consultant I cannot risk incompatibility at all.  My wife who is a university professor is constantly getting files from students that don't open in MS Word which really pisses her off and requires a call to IT support (me!!!) for assistance.

PS is different because so much is probably proprietary to the software in terms of legacy work residing on ones computer (unless you have saved them as flattened TIFF files).  Certainly going forward it might be easier to rationalize one of the other programs for PS functions but there 'might' be a LR issue (don't know for sure) if one is still using that Adobe program.
Logged

lhodaniel
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 36


« Reply #63 on: May 23, 2013, 01:41:52 PM »
ReplyReply

You know what, I personally think Adobe will eventually see sense and we will all get back together again and harmony will be restored, because we love their products so much and even though we might say that we don't and that we will find alternatives,

Dave, you might be a little optimistic. I've used Nikons since 1983. There have been a couple of times when Nikon has pissed me off to the point of *almost* switching to Canon. If I had gone through the pain and expense of that, I would have been Canon for life. This situation with Adobe for me is the same. The fact that there are no equal alternatives at present have made the exclusion of Adobe products painful. But, I am now formulating just that move. Once I do that, I will not return. Adobe has a very finite window to undo this, or they have lost me forever. I'm dumping LR right now, because it is a database. The more images I commit to it, the more edits I lose when they either move it to CC only or drop it. So, it stops now for me.
Logged
Isaac
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2758


« Reply #64 on: May 23, 2013, 01:56:39 PM »
ReplyReply

I'm dumping LR right now, because it is a database. The more images I commit to it, the more edits I lose when they either move it to CC only or drop it.

You seem to feel that will fix the problem but afaict it only moves the problem to whatever you decide to use next?

The only way I know to have an independent archive of images with edits is to build an archive of flattened tiffs exported from your software.

Do you have some other approach?
Logged
john beardsworth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2738



WWW
« Reply #65 on: May 23, 2013, 02:16:50 PM »
ReplyReply

The only way I know to have an independent archive of images with edits is to build an archive of flattened tiffs exported from your software.

Do you have some other approach?
DNG with the embedded previews updated.
Logged

Isaac
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2758


« Reply #66 on: May 23, 2013, 02:47:43 PM »
ReplyReply

DNG with the embedded previews updated.

Are DNG embedded previews lossy jpegs or a lossless format?
Logged
john beardsworth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2738



WWW
« Reply #67 on: May 23, 2013, 03:19:17 PM »
ReplyReply

Clearly lossy as they are JPEGs and only 8 bit. Peter Krogh used to do a demo (maybe still does) where he invited his audience to distinguish a print made from the raw data and one from the DNG's preview, and very few pro photographers could tell one from the other.
Logged

Isaac
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2758


« Reply #68 on: May 23, 2013, 03:47:25 PM »
ReplyReply

I wondered because one of the websites I looked at after you mentioned DNG was Peter Krogh's, and Figure 5 has the phrase "Previews may be saved as 16 bit, lossless images" which left me somewhat confused as I thought they were jpeg.
Logged
john beardsworth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2738



WWW
« Reply #69 on: May 23, 2013, 04:19:22 PM »
ReplyReply

Good point. I suspect the key is the word "can".
Logged

Dave (Isle of Skye)
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1003


Don't mistake lack of talent for genius.


WWW
« Reply #70 on: May 23, 2013, 07:00:48 PM »
ReplyReply

I do not want to upset anyone here, I really don't, so please allow me to get my apologies in first just in case I do, but I am sorry, because whenever I hear people on any of the forums around the net, talking about swapping out of PS to some other up and coming image editing tool, it makes me wonder just how much of the advanced functionality within PS they understand and are able to use, to even begin thinking that is a viable and alternative solution, it isn't.

And no, I am not an Adobe evangelist although I do seem to be addicted to PS. I have no intention of signing up to the cloud - actually it isn't the cloud or anything to do with cloud computing, it's just plain old DRM under another and supposedly easier to swallow name if you think about it.

I am going to stick with what I've got for at least the next 5 years and grit my teeth hoping Adobe come to their senses. CS6 will run on the latest W8 point release, so maybe I will be able to stretch that 5 years to around 8 years or so.

I intend to be a "Photoshop Survivalist".  Wink

Dave
Logged

Photography Tuition holidays on the Misty Isle of Skye
http://www.photography.info
lhodaniel
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 36


« Reply #71 on: May 23, 2013, 07:33:20 PM »
ReplyReply

You seem to feel that will fix the problem but afaict it only moves the problem to whatever you decide to use next?

The only way I know to have an independent archive of images with edits is to build an archive of flattened tiffs exported from your software.

Do you have some other approach?

That is true. But if I have to save TIFF's, that defeats the whole purpose of LR with parametric edits. I can save TIFF's with any raw converter. So far, none of the other companies have shown the mercenary traits that Adobe has. I'm taking a look at Capture NX2 and C1 Pro. I doubt if Nikon or Phase One will decide to only rent their cameras. I also think it's a good idea to separate the raw converter from the DAM.
Logged
Isaac
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2758


« Reply #72 on: May 23, 2013, 08:17:32 PM »
ReplyReply

That is true. But if I have to save TIFF's, that defeats the whole purpose of LR with parametric edits.

They serve different purposes: a non-proprietary image archive provides some longer-term safeguard of your independence; LR with parametric edits preserves IQ and provide convenience in the medium-term.
Logged
lhodaniel
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 36


« Reply #73 on: May 23, 2013, 08:44:19 PM »
ReplyReply

Isaac, right. But I don't have to use LR to get that. CNX2 does parametric edits to NEFs and exports to TIF. (I will save pristine nef copies too, if I go that route.) Dave, I have no intention of dumping what I have. I will use PSCS6 Standard until I can't. But, if I find an interesting editor other than PS, I might also support it. I won't dispose of LR 4.4 either. But it probably won't be my anchor app going forward.
Logged
JhnMhn
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 13


« Reply #74 on: May 23, 2013, 10:59:56 PM »
ReplyReply

Evolution is a good metaphor for what's going on now with Adobe's subscription-cloud-forcing move. Neither is progressive , predictable, or orderly. The biggest, baddest beast appears to be going to rule for ever… even as the meteor is approaching.Punctuated Equilibrium describes how things change slowly & gradually till some new perturbation sends everything off to a new and previously unpredicted, and unimaginable future.
Adobe has just severely perturbed things, and there is no going back. There will be increasingly competitive products that fill the opening Adobe has made and can't undo. Ironically, Adobe's CS 6 gives us time to get there. The coming alternatives also will not be burdened with Adobe's  patched together, memory-hogging bloatware, and could be better and more efficient.
Adobe may have control over their present, but the very near-term future is in increasing flux and far from in their control. My business will survive just fine because I am prepared to adapt and have removed Adobe's ring from my nose.
Ok, enough mixed metaphors, back to your regular programing.
Logged
Rhossydd
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1899


WWW
« Reply #75 on: May 24, 2013, 01:15:48 AM »
ReplyReply

it makes me wonder just how much of the advanced functionality within PS they understand and are able to use,
The issue is often that people don't need all that 'advanced functionality' at all and have woken up to understand that just upgrading by rote isn't really needed any more.
That's lead a lot of people to look elsewhere and have found other products that offer all they need, plus some of them actually have some useful features PS doesn't have.

CS4 has all I need and will still be first choice for editing for me for very many years. However looking around I've found that for some tasks other editors are actually easier to use.
Logged
Dave (Isle of Skye)
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1003


Don't mistake lack of talent for genius.


WWW
« Reply #76 on: May 24, 2013, 06:20:20 AM »
ReplyReply

The issue is often that people don't need all that 'advanced functionality' at all and have woken up to understand that just upgrading by rote isn't really needed any more.
That's lead a lot of people to look elsewhere and have found other products that offer all they need, plus some of them actually have some useful features PS doesn't have.

CS4 has all I need and will still be first choice for editing for me for very many years. However looking around I've found that for some tasks other editors are actually easier to use.

I entirely agree. I mean some people spend tens of thousands on kit, lenses and cameras gear and then leave everything set to 'auto' and if that works for them then that is fine, but for photographers that want full control of everything and use all the advanced functionality of every piece of kit and software tool they own, then the alternative image editing programs people are suggesting, will never get anywhere close to PS, I am sorry to say it, but it's true.

In fact I am just realising as I type this, that PS is just so bloody good and that we have all been witness to the birth and evolution of something outstanding, yet we never realised it until this licensing debacle reared its ugly head and took us all by surprise. Yet Adobe obviously realised it and how they now had all our family jewels cupped tightly in their hands, so thought it was about time they gave them a good squeeze, just to let us know who’s in control.

So if you want the advanced functionality that PS can offer, then I say dig in and wait until the storm passes, but if you can get by on auto, then by all means jump into whatever alternative image editing tool floats your boat.

Dave
« Last Edit: May 24, 2013, 06:24:44 AM by Dave (Isle of Skye) » Logged

Photography Tuition holidays on the Misty Isle of Skye
http://www.photography.info
Oldfox
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 76


« Reply #77 on: May 24, 2013, 06:49:29 AM »
ReplyReply

And no, I am not an Adobe evangelist although I do seem to be addicted to PS. I have no intention of signing up to the cloud...

I am going to stick with what I've got for at least the next 5 years and grit my teeth hoping Adobe come to their senses. CS6 will run on the latest W8 point release, so maybe I will be able to stretch that 5 years to around 8 years or so.

I intend to be a "Photoshop Survivalist".  Wink

Dave

+1/+1/+1/ Roll Eyes
Logged
lhodaniel
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 36


« Reply #78 on: May 24, 2013, 08:26:34 AM »
ReplyReply

There are those who will engage in Photoshop / Adobe snobbery. They consider those who would dare to try or use "lesser" software as graphically deficient simpletons who can't possibly be as good at their craft if they don't sing the Adobe mantra. It's the same with some Hasselblad, Phase One, Leica snobs. Or those that wouldn't dare to buy a Sigma 35 /1.4 because Sigma isn't "professional". Fortunately, I don't suffer from that. I'm not accusing anyone here of that trait, but it does exist.

I just bought a license to Sagelight. After trying it a few days, I am intrigued by the dynamic masking and layers approach it has. I haven't wrapped my head around its limitations yet. But at $40, I thought it would worth playing with and give support to the author to make it better. That is very cheap insurance against the Adobe protection racket.

Nobody asks a carpenter what brand of hammer he uses, and nobody forces him to rent that hammer. If other companies, particularly OS makers, try the same stunt as Adobe, I will be learning Linux and open-source software. The SAAS thieves might have their 5 years, but they might also bring in the Golden Age of open-source. Then those companies will starve.
Logged
ChuckT
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 20


« Reply #79 on: May 24, 2013, 10:48:01 AM »
ReplyReply

I'll toss this in & excuse the post if it's been mentioned ...

Nowhere have I seen Adobe offering me a truly attractive price AND T1 or fiber & guaranteed 24/7 access to "the cloud".

So the local utility (electric and/or cable) hiccups (yesterday we were down for what was probably 5-10 minutes tho it seemed like hours) and I lose everything I just did? No thanks.

Me - I've signed the petition and I’ll keep my CS5 & LR4 (personal purchase) until this nonsense clears up one way or the other.


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

Ad
Ad
Ad