Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: PS CC  (Read 3901 times)
eronald
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4122



« Reply #20 on: July 06, 2013, 01:33:39 PM »
ReplyReply

James,

I cannot disagree with anything you said there.

It would seem the camera marketing guys are as good at getting us to "need" the latest camera as fashion guys are at getting women to "need" new  $500 shoes every week or so Smiley

What is interesting is that I have stopped buying new computers, I just put more RAM in the old ones, and my two last camera buys have been 6 year old preowned models.

Edmund


Look, I'm not that wild about a subscription model, but since digital capture became the norm, all of us are in some form of subscription model whether we buy up front on in payments.

Even Edmund who shoots mostly for his own pleasure has been through camera after camera, system after system.

It's not an analog world, it's electronic and the electronic business model is to change and upgrade . . . sometimes for more money, sometimes for less.

Personally I find the time outlay to update software, change cameras, learn menus, a lot more bothersome and costly than the actual money for a software upgrade.

Who would have thought we would not only be photographer, director, processing lab, retoucher and pre press house, but every time a new digital film is introduced we would need to add a "part" to our processing machine and a new skill set.

What I find interesting, when I review past work I did with the Canon 1ds I don't see any real difference today, than I did then, other than our studios spends more time in front of the computer than ever.

Maybe it would have been smart to buy 4 1ds and 6 legacy computers, never change and keep shooting.  Probably would have worked, but few of us are built that way.

IMO

BC

« Last Edit: July 06, 2013, 01:39:44 PM by eronald » Logged
Frank Doorhof
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1523


WWW
« Reply #21 on: July 06, 2013, 02:11:32 PM »
ReplyReply

Yes and No James.
When I look at let's say 5 years ago and now there is a HUGE difference in workflow speed, options in Photoshop and filters I now use on a daily basis etc.

Could you not work with something from 5 years ago.... yeah of course.
But it's so handy what we have now Cheesy
Logged
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8208



WWW
« Reply #22 on: July 06, 2013, 08:34:19 PM »
ReplyReply

James,

I cannot disagree with anything you said there.

It would seem the camera marketing guys are as good at getting us to "need" the latest camera as fashion guys are at getting women to "need" new  $500 shoes every week or so Smiley

Yes and Adobe used to be doing a good job at convincing PS users to upgrade on a regular basis as well.

Considering that they are promising wonderful new features with CC... Either:
- they are right and people would have kept upgrading at the same pace without CC,
- they are not and then CC makes even less sense than we thought.

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7665


WWW
« Reply #23 on: July 06, 2013, 11:38:09 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

A better (optimal) way be to offer a perpetual license with a maintenance contract including free upgrades.

Best regards
Erik

Yes and Adobe used to be doing a good job at convincing PS users to upgrade on a regular basis as well.

Considering that they are promising wonderful new features with CC... Either:
- they are right and people would have kept upgrading at the same pace without CC,
- they are not and then CC makes even less sense than we thought.

Cheers,
Bernard

Logged

BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8208



WWW
« Reply #24 on: July 07, 2013, 02:26:55 AM »
ReplyReply

A better (optimal) way be to offer a perpetual license with a maintenance contract including free upgrades.

Absolutely, this would solve the #1 issue many of us have with the current CC framework, the fact that you will stop being able to edit your data if you stop paying.

From then on it is only a matter of pricing but Adobe would have a healthy pressure to keep prices reasonnable.

You should work in Adobe's board Erik! Smiley

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
Ken R
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 498


WWW
« Reply #25 on: July 07, 2013, 02:41:44 AM »
ReplyReply

I think there are already some good options other than photoshop for image processing and editing/compositing.

The CC monthly payments make sense for the more serious and or professional users who generally work on images every day or almost every day and really appreciate the improvements and refinements each new update of the software brings. For the casual user the cc is a disaster since those users generally do not update their software nearly as often and most likely they do not want or need to be worrying that their software will be deactivated and rendered useless if they miss a monthly payment and or the software can't connect to the internet and verify the license. (let alone the increased cost!).

I really do not like the business model of obligatory monthly payments on software. Most people have ENOUGH monthly payments as it is. It should be an option for those who want it but it should not be the only choice.

A lot of people will gravitate towards other software solutions and that will greatly reduce the adobe customer base.
Logged
Wayne Fox
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2886



WWW
« Reply #26 on: July 07, 2013, 03:26:26 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi Wayne

Just to bring this back to medium format, have you tried the camera-shake reduction feature? Seems to me it could prove more useful to medium format shooters than those working in smaller formats. In fact, it's the main reason I'm considering upgrading - sometimes you just have to shoot handheld ...

Peter
I  have tried the camera shake feature, and on some images the results are pretty amazing.
Logged

bcooter
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1161


Bang The Drum All Day


WWW
« Reply #27 on: July 07, 2013, 05:13:24 AM »
ReplyReply

Yes and No James.
When I look at let's say 5 years ago and now there is a HUGE difference in workflow speed, options in Photoshop and filters I now use on a daily basis etc.

Could you not work with something from 5 years ago.... yeah of course.
But it's so handy what we have now Cheesy

Frank,

I think you and I have different business models, but if we don't let's look at it this way.

The last few days we have been processing out thousands of images from a project, shot with two different camera makes, (plus two video cameras).

We're processing in light-room, because for some reason the latest C-1 is acting up on our machines and we don't have time to trouble shoot.  (We will later).

Frank, yes the tools are more powerful, but interesting is that whatever I see on the back of the camera, isn't close to the computer in light-room and the galleries we produce are just a semi-close look of what the finals will really look like once we go into actual post production, work layers, color, tone etc. etc.

It's funny, when we started with the original 1ds we set the white balance, some tone effects and used the out of camera jpegs for galleries and it was fast, easy, pretty good and I thought at the time digital was magic.

I could process out a 4 days shoot of web galleries and post them online in a day.  Today, we average about three days for each day shooting.

Now some of this is the economy and client expectations have changed, as we shoot approx. three times the set ups we did in the 1ds days, so I guess the post production time is a wash.

Still, during the time of the 1ds to our 1dx we've spent, $48,000 in canon bodies (upgrades).

Whew, even that number makes my head spin and honestly, the cameras are better but not over the moon better.

BTW:  that doesn't included another 60k for digital backs about the same for computers and software, about the same again for drives and servers, same again for lenses, same again for lighting and grip and none of this includes the video we've added to our repertoire.

These numbers are close more than a nice house in the suburbs, actually almost anyplace in the world, except Hong Kong.  (does Hong Kong have suburbs?)/

As far as the CC method, no I'm not crazy happy about it, seems there could be a better way to handle it and I think it's overpriced, though honestly I think most of the equipment we use today is overpriced, except for the Nikon D800 (sorry to mention that) the Canon 5d series and the new mirrorless cameras that have come to the market.

I still hold to the thought of whether we buy, rent, or subscribe, we've all been caught up in the subscription model when it comes to digital.

Buy a camera, then your going to need to upgrade your software to process it, Upgrade your software, you'll probably have to go to a new operating system, if your computer doesn't handle that, then it's on to a new computer and since most of these programs are touching nearly a gig, you'll need new internal drives and of course more external drives,  probably with different drive interfaces and the wheel keeps turning.

Now, about every two days, I as well as every other photographer on the planet gets a survey someone wants you to fill out, usually a camera or software company.

My suggestion is keep the prices low, keep the upgrades serious not partial and think about all of the other changes a photographer has to make every time they upgrade.

Actually my suggestion is to ask me what I estimate a job today, compared to 2007 and set your camera prices to the same level most of us are working at today.

So my original thought of keeping a 1ds1 forever . . . I think it sounds pretty good.

IMO

BC


P.S.  The cameras I'm enthralled with right now are the micro 4-3 system.    In one large messenger bag I have three bodies, 7 lenses, one light, radio and on camera sound, headphones and accessories.

These cameras have calibration for the lcds, wi-fi, fast lenses.

We can shoot stabilized video that is very, very good, stills that are more than acceptable and the cost of all of this is under 5k.

Now in my view that's where the market is going, maybe not 4-3, (I hope it does but . . .) if not 4-3 then smaller lighter faster mirrorless cameras.

« Last Edit: July 07, 2013, 05:20:47 AM by bcooter » Logged

heinrichvoelkel
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 368


« Reply #28 on: July 07, 2013, 08:15:10 AM »
ReplyReply



BC


P.S.  The cameras I'm enthralled with right now are the micro 4-3 system.    In one large messenger bag I have three bodies, 7 lenses, one light, radio and on camera sound, headphones and accessories.

These cameras have calibration for the lcds, wi-fi, fast lenses.


May I ask which micro 4-3 system gets you excited and in combination with which lenses? Sorry for going off topic.
Logged
eronald
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4122



« Reply #29 on: July 07, 2013, 10:47:19 AM »
ReplyReply

J,

 yes, Hong Kong has suburbs, they're called Canton Smiley

 apart from that, is the HUGE number of frames which are getting processed really advancing the quality of the work?

 It may amuse you, as I think no one in this forum will dispute my ability to use a Raw converter Smiley that I'm shooting mainly Jpeg these days, with Raw as a backup.

Edmund


Frank,

I think you and I have different business models, but if we don't let's look at it this way.

The last few days we have been processing out thousands of images from a project, shot with two different camera makes, (plus two video cameras).

We're processing in light-room, because for some reason the latest C-1 is acting up on our machines and we don't have time to trouble shoot.  (We will later).

Frank, yes the tools are more powerful, but interesting is that whatever I see on the back of the camera, isn't close to the computer in light-room and the galleries we produce are just a semi-close look of what the finals will really look like once we go into actual post production, work layers, color, tone etc. etc.

It's funny, when we started with the original 1ds we set the white balance, some tone effects and used the out of camera jpegs for galleries and it was fast, easy, pretty good and I thought at the time digital was magic.

I could process out a 4 days shoot of web galleries and post them online in a day.  Today, we average about three days for each day shooting.

Now some of this is the economy and client expectations have changed, as we shoot approx. three times the set ups we did in the 1ds days, so I guess the post production time is a wash.

Still, during the time of the 1ds to our 1dx we've spent, $48,000 in canon bodies (upgrades).

Whew, even that number makes my head spin and honestly, the cameras are better but not over the moon better.

BTW:  that doesn't included another 60k for digital backs about the same for computers and software, about the same again for drives and servers, same again for lenses, same again for lighting and grip and none of this includes the video we've added to our repertoire.

These numbers are close more than a nice house in the suburbs, actually almost anyplace in the world, except Hong Kong.  (does Hong Kong have suburbs?)/

As far as the CC method, no I'm not crazy happy about it, seems there could be a better way to handle it and I think it's overpriced, though honestly I think most of the equipment we use today is overpriced, except for the Nikon D800 (sorry to mention that) the Canon 5d series and the new mirrorless cameras that have come to the market.

I still hold to the thought of whether we buy, rent, or subscribe, we've all been caught up in the subscription model when it comes to digital.

Buy a camera, then your going to need to upgrade your software to process it, Upgrade your software, you'll probably have to go to a new operating system, if your computer doesn't handle that, then it's on to a new computer and since most of these programs are touching nearly a gig, you'll need new internal drives and of course more external drives,  probably with different drive interfaces and the wheel keeps turning.

Now, about every two days, I as well as every other photographer on the planet gets a survey someone wants you to fill out, usually a camera or software company.

My suggestion is keep the prices low, keep the upgrades serious not partial and think about all of the other changes a photographer has to make every time they upgrade.

Actually my suggestion is to ask me what I estimate a job today, compared to 2007 and set your camera prices to the same level most of us are working at today.

So my original thought of keeping a 1ds1 forever . . . I think it sounds pretty good.

IMO

BC


P.S.  The cameras I'm enthralled with right now are the micro 4-3 system.    In one large messenger bag I have three bodies, 7 lenses, one light, radio and on camera sound, headphones and accessories.

These cameras have calibration for the lcds, wi-fi, fast lenses.

We can shoot stabilized video that is very, very good, stills that are more than acceptable and the cost of all of this is under 5k.

Now in my view that's where the market is going, maybe not 4-3, (I hope it does but . . .) if not 4-3 then smaller lighter faster mirrorless cameras.


Logged
Frank Doorhof
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1523


WWW
« Reply #30 on: July 08, 2013, 01:03:59 AM »
ReplyReply

Don't get me wrong james, I'm in sync with what you say.
I still shoot film and find myself almost changing nothing to the scans, also with digital I try to get 99% of the shot in camera, I even experiment with m42 lenses to get also as much of the look I want in camera instead of having to tinker in PS, wasted time in my opinion, fact is however that what took me 20 minutes 5 years ago, now can be done in a few clicks, that's more what I meant. Especially plugins have gotten enormously good.

The Fujifilm cameras stunned me personally and are always with me, the sensor design is genius, no moire and razor sharp, and indeed small Wink

Also the Sony a99 has surprised me, to a point I switched from canon to Sony, I'm looking forward to a camera without mirror and curtain to really break open some new ways to shoot, I think Sony will be leading the market with this in the next 5-10 years.

It are exciting times, but the fact is, a good shot is done with what's behind our eyes and not what's in front.
Logged
bcooter
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1161


Bang The Drum All Day


WWW
« Reply #31 on: July 08, 2013, 03:03:24 AM »
ReplyReply



It are exciting times, but the fact is, a good shot is done with what's behind our eyes and not what's in front.

I agree somewhat exciting times and I also like the A99.  I haven't fully tested one yet, but after the Panasonic gh3 and olympus omd, I'm finding the non Nikon, Canon cameras to be outstanding and Sony can make very fine equipment.

Since we already have Zeiss Sony mount lenses for our Sony video cam we convert, it wouldn't be a great leap to go Sony. 

If I do I probably will sell of the Nikon lenses and Canon bodies, (keep the Canon lenses for our Scarlet.

I still would like to see smaller 35mm cameras, somewhat like the OMD, just about 10% larger which is almost 35mm film camera dimensions.

BTW:  I got C-1 running again and after comparing my processing from lightroom 4 to C-1, I reprocessed most of the imagery in C-1.  It is just that much better for the Canon files.

Just wish it had a few of lightrooms functions.

IMO

BC
Logged

Frank Doorhof
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1523


WWW
« Reply #32 on: July 08, 2013, 03:59:49 AM »
ReplyReply

Did you even try DxO James, I find that they have some of the finest engines for Canon/Nikon and Sony.

Sony is indeed exciting, for me one of the driving reasons was the WYSIWYG EVF (working EVF) and the fact IS in the body.
I love to work with old lenses for their special look and colors (minolta colors Smiley) and with focus peaking in the viewfinder this works like a charm.

Combined I travel a lot lighter with the A99 than with the Canon, and most of the times it just lifts the weight to a point where I don't have a problem with airport security Cheesy
Logged
Pages: « 1 [2]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad