Pages: 1 ... 9 10 [11] 12 13 ... 37   Go Down

Author Topic: Adobe diverging Creative Cloud and Standard versions  (Read 114334 times)

jrsforums

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 858
Re: Adobe diverging Creative Cloud and Standard versions
« Reply #200 on: May 07, 2013, 03:31:44 PM »

And you can go from Adobe to someone else's software. You can't re-use the stuff you didn't see from your cable subscription last month (DVR not withstanding).
So are TIFFs. The phone is the phone. What is it without a subscription plan? It's a little computer but it's not a phone. You stop paying Sprint, you stop getting phone service. The numbers on that phone or the phone itself is totally different. That's hardware.  
Which are useful to do what if you don't pay the subscription to get onto the web? There IS software back there allowing you to do that. And the software stops working when you stop paying your ISP's subscription. Just like HBO stops when you don't pay the cable bill. What good is Safari if you can't use it to access the data on the web you subscribe to?


The services you initially used in your example are the problem.  None directly relate to the situation or concerns that CC is driving.

Magazines are the closest.  With a magazine, if the subscription stops you still have the old copies.  The reason you stopped the subscription is you decided you did not want any new ones.

The other examples are examples of fluid, on-going access to new material (TV, Cable, phone/text activity) or stored material (movies, internet sites, TV replays, social media).  Continued access to these is a choice we can make and start/stop easily at our will.  Changing access to them (provider) is relatively easy and will provide similar, if not identical experience.

The PS CC situation is a bit different.  Yes, we still have the beginning point...the RAW image, so we can start again.  Yes, we can have the end point, the Tiff...the flattened tiff.  But what about the work product.  What if we do not want to start over, just modify one non-destructive aspect of the rendering....that is gone.

It is even worse if we consider Lightroom (which is available separately, but available currently CC).  If the CC sub ends, so does LR....where most of the work product is not stored or saved as tiff or jpeg.  What a disaster that would be...!!

The point is, the Adobe situation is unique and does, and should, build fear of losing precious work that we have done.  Whether Adobe sees fit to work to relieve these concerns is their choice, just as it is our choice to look at areas where we can protect our interests...i.e. other products.  And don't get me wrong, I like the products and have a CC sub....I just need to protect my images (just like the Photo CD discussion we had)
Logged
John

Mark D Segal

  • Contributor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8221
    • http://www.markdsegal.com
Re: Adobe diverging Creative Cloud and Standard versions
« Reply #201 on: May 07, 2013, 03:38:58 PM »



It is even worse if we consider Lightroom (which is available separately, but available currently CC).  If the CC sub ends, so does LR....where most of the work product is not stored or saved as tiff or jpeg.  What a disaster that would be...!!



Hold on. We still have LR as a perpetual license product. We don't know, if/when that status will be changed. BUT, LR does preserve our original raw files in their raw format, or in DNG or in both depending on how we format our LR arrangements. We will always be able to open our original raw files - and even worked ones with any version of LR or other software that recognizes the raw format and perhaps the XMP metadata if we edited using that. So even IF LR were to become a rented service to which we choose not to subscribe, it's not clear to me that our raw files would become inaccessible. We may suffer workflow inconveniences and the loss of unreadable edits if what we use next is incompatible with the latest version of LR in which the file was worked. That would be bad, but not necessarily a disaster.
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

BartvanderWolf

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 5472
Re: Adobe diverging Creative Cloud and Standard versions
« Reply #202 on: May 07, 2013, 03:40:59 PM »

I'm not sure where that came from but the CC FAQ seems to imply otherwise:

It came from here:
Quote
Myth #5: I will be forced to always run the latest version of the software

You are not forced to upgrade. You can continue to run which ever versions of the software that you want until YOU are ready to upgrade. This is crucial for workflows that involve working with clients or vendors that may not be on the latest versions of the software. You can continue using your current version of the product for one full year after the subsequent version is released.

Cheers,
Bart
« Last Edit: May 07, 2013, 03:42:54 PM by BartvanderWolf »
Logged
== If you do what you did, you'll get what you got. ==

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11529
    • http://digitaldog.net/
Re: Adobe diverging Creative Cloud and Standard versions
« Reply #203 on: May 07, 2013, 03:43:18 PM »

I'm not sure where that came from but the CC FAQ seems to imply otherwise:

Excellent, thanks. So nix that last scenario, no forced updates. Keep the old hardware.
Logged
Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/

Stephen Girimont

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 74
    • The Intimate Landscape
Re: Adobe diverging Creative Cloud and Standard versions
« Reply #204 on: May 07, 2013, 03:46:36 PM »

Excellent, thanks. So nix that last scenario, no forced updates. Keep the old hardware.
I hope that's the case, but we seem to have conflicting information from Adobe (not surprising given the scope of this change). Hopefully, they'll be able to clear it up. I really can't see Adobe FORCING such an update as that really does cross the boundaries into monopolistic behavior.
Logged

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11529
    • http://digitaldog.net/
Re: Adobe diverging Creative Cloud and Standard versions
« Reply #205 on: May 07, 2013, 03:47:24 PM »

The other examples are examples of fluid, on-going access to new material (TV, Cable, phone/text activity) or stored material (movies, internet sites, TV replays, social media).  Continued access to these is a choice we can make and start/stop easily at our will.

Just like a software product. Sorry, I don't see the big distinctions here. The newer process is, well newer, different, has some big advantages and some big disadvantages. You either buy into the proposition and upgrade or you don't.  
Logged
Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/

AFairley

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1460
Re: Adobe diverging Creative Cloud and Standard versions
« Reply #206 on: May 07, 2013, 03:53:02 PM »

This is an effort to save the small retailers. 

Wayne is right on target.  I am going to hate hate hate having to pay an extra 9% on my big ticket purchases, but sales tax on internet purchases is an idea that is years overdue.  Ecommerce is no longer a nascent industry that needs nurturing.
Logged

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11529
    • http://digitaldog.net/
Re: Adobe diverging Creative Cloud and Standard versions
« Reply #207 on: May 07, 2013, 03:58:58 PM »

I hope that's the case, but we seem to have conflicting information from Adobe (not surprising given the scope of this change). Hopefully, they'll be able to clear it up. I really can't see Adobe FORCING such an update as that really does cross the boundaries into monopolistic behavior.

It IS the case:

http://www.adobe.com/products/creativecloud/faq.html


As a Creative Cloud member, am I required to install an upgrade to a desktop application when it becomes available?
No. You are not required to install any new version of the desktop applications available in Creative Cloud. You can continue using your current version of the product as long as you have an active membership. You have flexibility on when you install a new release to take advantage of new product features, if you choose to do so.
Logged
Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/

Rhossydd

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2349
    • http://www.paulholman.com
Re: Adobe diverging Creative Cloud and Standard versions
« Reply #208 on: May 07, 2013, 04:00:07 PM »

We may suffer workflow inconveniences and the loss of unreadable edits if what we use next is incompatible with the latest version of LR in which the file was worked. That would be bad, but not necessarily a disaster.
I wonder if Phase One, DXO or ACDSee are working on a migration tool ?
Having looked today at the current version of C1 it's looking a very similar program to LR, one I could probably live with and there are some features I like more than LR anyway.
A lot of the DAM features could be migrated and I'd guess that they could make a fair stab at converting some parts of the processing settings to something that was close enough to work with.

Given the next version LR5b isn't looking a very compelling upgrade now and with the subscription only option looming, maybe it's time to stop investing in LR and move to a more photographic centric company to spend my money with in future.
Logged

Stephen Girimont

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 74
    • The Intimate Landscape
Re: Adobe diverging Creative Cloud and Standard versions
« Reply #209 on: May 07, 2013, 04:15:42 PM »

It IS the case:

http://www.adobe.com/products/creativecloud/faq.html


As a Creative Cloud member, am I required to install an upgrade to a desktop application when it becomes available?
No. You are not required to install any new version of the desktop applications available in Creative Cloud. You can continue using your current version of the product as long as you have an active membership. You have flexibility on when you install a new release to take advantage of new product features, if you choose to do so.
Yes, I've seen that. Unfortunately, there is another Adobe FAQ (of sorts) that conflicts with this...
http://blogs.adobe.com/dreamweaver/2013/03/5-myths-about-adobe-creative-cloud.html
Logged

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11529
    • http://digitaldog.net/
Re: Adobe diverging Creative Cloud and Standard versions
« Reply #210 on: May 07, 2013, 04:17:50 PM »

Yes, I've seen that. Unfortunately, there is another Adobe FAQ (of sorts) that conflicts with this...
http://blogs.adobe.com/dreamweaver/2013/03/5-myths-about-adobe-creative-cloud.html

That link seems equally clear:

Myth #5: I will be forced to always run the latest version of the software.

You are not forced to upgrade.
Logged
Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/

Colorwave

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1007
    • Colorwave Imaging
Re: Adobe diverging Creative Cloud and Standard versions
« Reply #211 on: May 07, 2013, 04:22:25 PM »

Hold on. We still have LR as a perpetual license product. We don't know, if/when that status will be changed.
I don't think you could find a wagering partner that would be willing to bet that Adobe will ultimately not consolidate their approach and treat LR the same way as the rest of CS.  Just look at John Nack's blog, and his stating that with the advent of CC that perpetual licensing was destined to remain a parallel option to subscription.  He's trying to back off of being called for that about face now, but it is obvious that they want to force their customer's hand, but head fake until they actually make their move.
Logged

Stephen Girimont

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 74
    • The Intimate Landscape
Re: Adobe diverging Creative Cloud and Standard versions
« Reply #212 on: May 07, 2013, 04:30:52 PM »

That link seems equally clear:

Myth #5: I will be forced to always run the latest version of the software.

You are not forced to upgrade.

You can't stop there. Here is the full statement (once again): You are not forced to upgrade. You can continue to run which ever versions of the software that you want until YOU are ready to upgrade. This is crucial for workflows that involve working with clients or vendors that may not be on the latest versions of the software. You can continue using your current version of the product for one full year after the subsequent version is released.

Confusing and conflicting? Yes indeed.
Logged

Gulag

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 336
Re: Adobe diverging Creative Cloud and Standard versions
« Reply #213 on: May 07, 2013, 04:40:41 PM »

For open-source: I know there is GIMP, which supports 16-bit color, and really powerful ImageJ, which supports 32-bit color.

I'd love to hear what your views on any other meaningful alternatives to Photoshop out there.
Logged
"Photography is our exorcism. Primitive society had its masks, bourgeois society its mirrors. We have our images."

— Jean Baudrillard

jrsforums

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 858
Re: Adobe diverging Creative Cloud and Standard versions
« Reply #214 on: May 07, 2013, 04:49:03 PM »

Hold on. We still have LR as a perpetual license product. We don't know, if/when that status will be changed. BUT, LR does preserve our original raw files in their raw format, or in DNG or in both depending on how we format our LR arrangements. We will always be able to open our original raw files - and even worked ones with any version of LR or other software that recognizes the raw format and perhaps the XMP metadata if we edited using that. So even IF LR were to become a rented service to which we choose not to subscribe, it's not clear to me that our raw files would become inaccessible. We may suffer workflow inconveniences and the loss of unreadable edits if what we use next is incompatible with the latest version of LR in which the file was worked. That would be bad, but not necessarily a disaster.

Sorry, Mark...thought I made it clear that LR was available as perpetual license...but was anticipating problems if it became ONLY CC...or if someone was using it under CC license, which ended and could not then get a perpetual license.

The problem I see is not relative to RAWs.  They are unchanged.

Don't know about your workflow, but if you do most/all of your processing, printing, emailing, website update (Smugmug, Flickr, Zenfolio, etc) you probably have rendered tiffs or jpegs, but you have probably not saved them.  Anytime you need to do something, you just need to recreate it and print/send it.  All the LR instructions of what changes you made are in XMP (catalog and/or file).  Without a working copy of LR available, all your development work is lost.  

In addition, without the catalog, any organizational structures, such as collections are also gone.

I guess what I was trying to point out is LR as subscription only has more concerns than PS.  At least with PS, when you save you will create a file.  With LR, no such file exists, unless you work outside the workflow that, I believe, LR was designed for.
Logged
John

kirkt

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 345
Re: Adobe diverging Creative Cloud and Standard versions
« Reply #215 on: May 07, 2013, 05:07:21 PM »

There's also Photoline, which supports some PS plug-ins - costs 59 Euro.  The interface is just as quirky as GIMP, so you should feel right at home.  8, 16 and 32 bit support.

http://www.pl32.com

kirk

Logged

daws

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 282
Re: Adobe diverging Creative Cloud and Standard versions
« Reply #216 on: May 07, 2013, 05:11:15 PM »

The readers' comments to the story in the Los Angeles Times, "Adobe shifts Creative software to the cloud, monthly subscription" are universally negative.

Some samples:

Quote
Endless paying for something you will never truely own? Sounds like a Wall Street wet dream.

What are they going to call it, the "got you by the package" package?

Somebody in marketing needs to be fired.

Quote
The tried and true pay once model has worked well for decades, and I see this as little more than a ploy to stretch profits across the 18-24 month version cycle.

Even if I were to accept this model, there is no way I would use it all year, I would just use my older (locally installed) versions for the bulk of my work, and maybe use the Cloud version once in a while... So Adobe will loose my money 90% of the time.

I just hope this drives more options from other vendors, as businesses refuse to budget in this fee based model.

Quote
Subscription based billing leads to unfinished/mediocre software releases with the classic “premium service” upgrades to follow soon afterward. Look what happen to video games… I haven’t touched my Xbox in almost a year because now the software developers nickel & dime you for every little add on under the sun. 14 year olds will put up with that, but not businesses already struggling to make ends meet.

Quote
Apparently Adobe is now being run by Mayor Carmine De Pasto.
Logged

Mark D Segal

  • Contributor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8221
    • http://www.markdsegal.com
Re: Adobe diverging Creative Cloud and Standard versions
« Reply #217 on: May 07, 2013, 05:11:56 PM »

Sorry, Mark...thought I made it clear that LR was available as perpetual license...but was anticipating problems if it became ONLY CC...or if someone was using it under CC license, which ended and could not then get a perpetual license.

The problem I see is not relative to RAWs.  They are unchanged.

Don't know about your workflow, but if you do most/all of your processing, printing, emailing, website update (Smugmug, Flickr, Zenfolio, etc) you probably have rendered tiffs or jpegs, but you have probably not saved them.  Anytime you need to do something, you just need to recreate it and print/send it.  All the LR instructions of what changes you made are in XMP (catalog and/or file).  Without a working copy of LR available, all your development work is lost.  

In addition, without the catalog, any organizational structures, such as collections are also gone.

I guess what I was trying to point out is LR as subscription only has more concerns than PS.  At least with PS, when you save you will create a file.  With LR, no such file exists, unless you work outside the workflow that, I believe, LR was designed for.

JRS, my workflow is this: I ingest the images from the camera card to folders bespoke per subject on my hard-drive, which is backed-up with Time Machine. And those remain "forever". I import them into the LR catalog using the option to leave them where they are. All that does is create a catalog "shortcut" and a thumbnail in LR for reviewing the images and keeping them organized within LR. Whatever happens to LR, the original raw files are still present and properly organized in my hard-drive. So if LR disappeared tomorrow, the images and their organization are unaffected. To process the images, I don't DNG them; I keep the OEM raw format and copy all changes to XMP sidecars. Those sidecars remain as permanent files with their corresponding images on my drive. ANY application that can, or at some time in the future can be made to read that XMP data will be able to use it. So yes, loosing LR for this function may be problematic, but not necessarily a train-smash. And once I've printed the photos I consider keepers that deserve printing, realistcally how often will I want to come back to how many of those files in the future? I'll worry about LR if and when the time comes. For now I'm pretty relaxed about it. There are things in life to lose sleep over but this isn't one of them - yet.
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

walter.sk

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1359
Re: Adobe diverging Creative Cloud and Standard versions
« Reply #218 on: May 07, 2013, 05:24:00 PM »

I'm ticked off about the effective increase in cost to me.  I am also retired, on a small, fixed income.  I use LR4 for raw processing and DAM, but much of my work involves layers, compositing and other PS-necessary processing.  I've been upgrading PS every 18 or so months, at about $180 per version.

I looked at the options for CC, and even had a chat online with an Adobe chatterer.  He left me just as confused about pricing as I was before the chat.  I'm hoping somebody here has it straight and could help me out.  Here's my situation:

I have Photoshop CS6, standard version (not the extended).  If I go to the cloud as an individual and want only Photoshop CC, it seemed to me that the $9.99/month promotion would obtain for a year, followed by an increase to the $19.99/month cost.

The Adobe chat guy started by saying that was so, but then said I would have to get the $29.99/month plan, and then go to an increase from that after a year.

Does anybody here know for sure?
Logged

Ralph Eisenberg

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 83
Re: Adobe diverging Creative Cloud and Standard versions
« Reply #219 on: May 07, 2013, 05:28:24 PM »

In Europe, the rates are even higher, as has been pointed out above, even for the English language version. This whole matter is very disappointing and alienating.
Logged
Ralph
Pages: 1 ... 9 10 [11] 12 13 ... 37   Go Up