Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Digital Image Processing => Topic started by: Dave (Isle of Skye) on May 09, 2013, 09:54:46 am
-
I know there is a lot of heat being generated about the commitment of Adobe to the Creative Cloud business model, as against the perpetual licensing business model etc, and I know that someone like myself who has spent £1,000's over the years on Adobe products, might now appear to be of little ongoing importance to them, because I no longer represent their core market, as I am not a corporate multi-license user, but just a one man business and pro user of their products - yes I know this is an odd way for them to treat their loyal customer base, but that is an argument for another ongoing thread I think.
So putting all the misquoted and misrepresented hyperbole aside and arguments about who is right and who is wrong etc., all Adobe need to do to keep me on board as an on-going loyal money paying customer, is to continue developing and selling ACR to me as a PS plug-in, that will retain support for PS CS6 and upwards. So instead of giving ACR away each time there is an update as has happened in the past, I can then simply buy it as an updated plug-in. That way I get to keep Photoshop as a stand-alone app and yet still have support for new camera models and their proprietary file formats when they are released, as well as any improvements of the RAW conversion and processing engine.
Surely this is not too much to ask?
This idea will probably get shot down in flames, but before you do, let's all be honest, PS has probably been developed about as far as it can reasonably be expected to go for photographers, yes I know tweaks can always be added, but to all intents and purposes the product is 'complete' and doesn't really need any further major developments, as far as photographers are concerned at least. So maybe this is a good time for us to be pushed off the merry-go-round in favour of allowing them to concentrate on the corporate and graphic arts user markets, but please Adobe, at least allow us to continue with ACR updates, even if we have to pay for them as plug-ins, which I think you will find, we will all be very happy to do.
Dave
-
The first version of ACR was indeed provided as a separate plug-in purchase, but honestly I don't expect a return to that model.
What Adobe has committed to doing is continuing to provide ACR for CS6, as long as CS6 continues to be sold. For example, Camera Raw 8 will soon be released for CC, but it will also run under CS6 and provide support for new camera models, bug fixes, etc. If you already have CS6, this means getting a free update of Camera Raw.
(Of course, there is a separate long-term question of what happens if you were to update your OS to a new version under which CS6 no longer runs ...)
-
The first version of ACR was indeed provided as a separate plug-in purchase, but honestly I don't expect a return to that model.
What Adobe has committed to doing is continuing to provide ACR for CS6, as long as CS6 continues to be sold. For example, Camera Raw 8 will soon be released for CC, but it will also run under CS6 and provide support for new camera models, bug fixes, etc. If you already have CS6, this means getting a free update of Camera Raw.
(Of course, there is a separate long-term question of what happens if you were to update your OS to a new version under which CS6 no longer runs ...)
Well I do see what you are saying, but I think 128 bit computing is still a way off, so CS6 should run for quite some time yet I think (hopefully).
But I suppose Adobe could release an OS update to resolve that situation when/if it arrives - but who knows what the future will hold, I am just trying to think of a way around this, that keeps as many people as possible, as happy as possible :)
Dave
-
So putting all the misquoted and misrepresented hyperbole aside and arguments about who is right and who is wrong etc., all Adobe need to do to keep me on board as an on-going loyal money paying customer, is to continue developing and selling ACR to me as a PS plug-in, that will retain support for PS CS6 and upwards. So instead of giving ACR away each time there is an update as has happened in the past, I can then simply buy it as an updated plug-in. That way I get to keep Photoshop as a stand-alone app and yet still have support for new camera models and their proprietary file formats when they are released, as well as any improvements of the RAW conversion and processing engine.
Dave
With Adobe's DNG Converter, you can convert your future RAW files to DNG and open those in an existing version of ACR.
-
Well I do see what you are saying, but I think 128 bit computing is still a way off, so CS6 should run for quite some time yet I think (hopefully).
I believe there's more to all this than just that. I can't recall how many times in recent years, either due to newer hardware, OS requirements or whatever, older versions of software can't run any longer. Didn't we just see this with LR and perhaps CS6 (new hardware or OS requirements)?
Apple for example could come out with OS11 and CS6 could be stopped dead in it's tracks. Do I upgrade my OS or not, just to use an old version of PS?
-
With Adobe's DNG Converter, you can convert your future RAW files to DNG and open those in an existing version of ACR.
OR save a flattened TIFF from an old version of Photoshop (CS6). How does this mitigate the CC issues?
-
OR save a flattened TIFF from an old version of Photoshop (CS6). How does this mitigate the CC issues?
That doesn't help for RAW files from newer cameras that are introduced post ACR8 (assuming that's the last version that will be updated for CS6).
As far as mitigating the CC issues that Dave is concerned about, it seems to do that pretty well. That assumes, of course, that Adobe continues to make its DNG Converter freely available and updates it for new cameras as ACR is updated. Dave is concerned about being able to work with RAW files from new cameras in the future and not being able to do so in the last version of ACR that was updated for CS6. It seems that, with the noted caveats, the DNG Converter should allow him to retain CS6 and still work with RAW files from newer cameras. Am I missing something?
-
If Adobe have made their choice for the path forward as they see it, then there is little we can do about it, all this moaning (and I do include myself in this) is just a waste of energy. We might not like what they are doing, but we are stuck with it, so all we can hope to do is either jump on board, or find some way that we can at least cling on to what we have got, for as long as possible. That is all I am suggesting and forlornly hope that Adobe is listening.
Yes it does smack of desperation doesn't it?
Dave
-
I can't recall how many times in recent years, either due to newer hardware, OS requirements or whatever, older versions of software can't run any longer. Didn't we just see this with LR and perhaps CS6 (new hardware or OS requirements)? Apple for example could come out with OS11 and CS6 could be stopped dead in it's tracks. Do I upgrade my OS or not, just to use an old version of PS?
I've got a copy of Snow Leopard Server set up inside Mountain Lion as a VM to address this problem with a couple of other legacy apps, but have managed to move on anyway.
This current situation is a boon for other developers to step in and step it up.
-
That doesn't help for RAW files from newer cameras that are introduced post ACR8 (assuming that's the last version that will be updated for CS6).
As far as mitigating the CC issues that Dave is concerned about, it seems to do that pretty well. That assumes, of course, that Adobe continues to make its DNG Converter freely available and updates it for new cameras as ACR is updated. Dave is concerned about being able to work with RAW files from new cameras in the future and not being able to do so in the last version of ACR that was updated for CS6. It seems that, with the noted caveats, the DNG Converter should allow him to retain CS6 and still work with RAW files from newer cameras. Am I missing something?
Yes Bob that is indeed possible, but the DNG converter is a batch conversion utility, and I am assuming that as I use Bridge to pre-select the files and only the files I wish to convert and then process, that the ACR updates will still allow Bridge in CS6 to continue working well into the future with newer camera models as they come out. The DNG converter (I believe, as I have it but have never had a need to use it - yet) would mean that I have to batch convert ALL my files as 16 bit Tiffs, before I even get a chance to see them, which would be a long and tortuous process and require even more HDD space - although I suppose I can always use the crappy S/W that comes with a new camera to view and convert files.
I can already see, where some smart software developer, will come out with a simple stand alone RAW viewer and converter, that will then launch your chosen files straight into PS and make themselves a fortune.
And good luck to them I say :)
Dave
-
Hi Eric - In regards to your comment below (bold emphasis mine):
"What Adobe has committed to doing is continuing to provide ACR for CS6, as long as CS6 continues to be sold. "
This doesn't ease my concerns. When it's discontinued in 12-24 months, what then? As long as LR stays the way it is, I'm ok but if it all goes CC and PS6 is canned, what then, many of us wonder.
Eric, as a "little guy" (avid amateur photographer, who loyally purchased each new upgrade) I'd really be ok with the CC idea if ONE component changed.
Why can't folks like us commit to a 1-2 year CC subscription with the understanding that, at the end of the 1 or 2 year commitment, whatever we've "rented" we keep?
Knowing that would make all the difference to me and many who might worry about their income changing, Adobe prices going up, lack of use/need, etc. If that could happen, I'd sign up ASAP. Without it, I don't think it makes sense (for me) to rent an app knowing there's no way out and, possibly, nothing to return to after a few years.
I'm not asking Adobe to change their decision...just amend it to make this possible and I'd bet most of the angst would evaporate.
Thanks for considering this suggestion and for all you do (and people like Jeff Schewe do, who's seemingly at war over this with 1/2 the forum!) for the photographic community.
Phil Weber
-
Those are already out there, Dave. Raw Therapee is one that is highly regarded.
-
Raw Therapee is one that is highly regarded.
+1
Cheers,
Bart
-
The issue with the OS versions is that newer OS versions tend to "deprecate" old APIs. This is tech talk for saying that existing programs that were developed on older OS versions may not work on the new OS versions (either they won't run, or they'll run but some piece of functionality stops working). An example of this would be printer drivers that were designed for Leopard -- they had to be updated for Snow Leopard due to color changes in the operating system. Continuing to use the older print drivers would work, but would produce incorrect colors.
CS6 should work fine on the current OS versions and the ones after that (e.g., 10.9 on the Mac when it's released), but beyond that I have no idea.
-
The issue with the OS versions is that newer OS versions tend to "deprecate" old APIs. This is tech talk for saying that existing programs that were developed on older OS versions may not work on the new OS versions (either they won't run, or they'll run but some piece of functionality stops working). An example of this would be printer drivers that were designed for Leopard -- they had to be updated for Snow Leopard due to color changes in the operating system. Continuing to use the older print drivers would work, but would produce incorrect colors.
CS6 should work fine on the current OS versions and the ones after that (e.g., 10.9 on the Mac when it's released), but beyond that I have no idea.
Of course one can always move to Windows which seems to be more concerned about backward compatibility than does Apple. I guess I better continue to stock parts for my newly build computer!
-
Of course one can always move to Windows which seems to be more concerned about backward compatibility than does Apple. I guess I better continue to stock parts for my newly build computer!
Apple people will tell you that's why Windows is so bloated and cumbersome. ;D
-
Apple people will tell you that's why Windows is so bloated and cumbersome. ;D
I know but I can build a computer that runs everything that I need it to for only 1/2 the cost of retail and I'm not locked into the AppleOS craziness!
-
I know but I can build a computer that runs everything that I need it to for only 1/2 the cost of retail and I'm not locked into the AppleOS craziness!
No argument here. I'm a Windows user. Built a new machine last summer.
-
I prefer Macs. I don't want to be locked into Windows only.
Sal
-
There is little doubt that deprecating old APIs and effectively "forcing" all users to use the most recent OS (and all application developers to develop specifically for that OS) is an effective strategy for reducing the QA testing complexity, improving security and a host of other good things for quality (or keeping the quality constant, reducing the staff and increasing profits)
There are some drawbacks, though. The Microsoft strategy seemed to be that "software is king": once people bought a piece of software they expected to be able to use that application for "eternity" without updates. Is this working for Microsoft right now? Are they in the dominant position they used to be? Perhaps not. I think it is strange to view this choice as anything but a trade-off; Apple chose one trade-off, Microsoft another.
http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000054.html
...
Jon Ross, who wrote the original version of SimCity for Windows 3.x, told me that he accidentally left a bug in SimCity where he read memory that he had just freed. Yep. It worked fine on Windows 3.x, because the memory never went anywhere. Here's the amazing part: On beta versions of Windows 95, SimCity wasn't working in testing. Microsoft tracked down the bug and added specific code to Windows 95 that looks for SimCity. If it finds SimCity running, it runs the memory allocator in a special mode that doesn't free memory right away. That's the kind of obsession with backward compatibility that made people willing to upgrade to Windows 95.
For programs that are not very demanding on resources or low-level hardware-access, one might expect virtualization tools to solve all problems: dump the application to some sand-boxed environment that makes it happy, use it for your work, stay happy.
-h
-
I prefer Macs. I don't want to be locked into Windows only.
Sal
That's just too funny for words.
-
That's just too funny for words.
I agree. A lot of people don't consider that Macs run Windows and OSX. Fortunately MS and Apple are both doing very well so they don't need promotion from us.
Sal
-
Those are already out there, Dave. Raw Therapee is one that is highly regarded.
Bob, I have just had a look at Raw Therapee and it looks rather good, thanks for the info :)
Dave
-
Bob, I have just had a look at Raw Therapee and it looks rather good, thanks for the info :)
In fact, and I've mentioned it on other occasions as well, the conversion quality (Amaze algorithm) is very good and delivers very high resolution with very few artifacts. It also has a Raw data histogram! Essential for those who want to get the most out of their (bracketed) exposures. The number of available options may look intimidating at first, but you don't need to use all of them ;)
Cheers,
Bart
-
But Raw Therapee must be used with some discipline because it is too easy to degrade the image quality by piling up unfortunate combinations of the many, many possible adjustments. But yes, there are some amazing things in Raw Therapee (like Impulse noise reduction) and it is relatively free of the problems one usually finds in open software. If used well it could be all you need.
Unfortunately it does not seem to handle high ISO D800 raws as nicely as LR, which may have to do with the current 64 bit Windows release being nearly a year old. None of the built-in demosaic algorithms was quite as effective as LR's on that high ISO stuff. If you try it, you need to specifically select "system monitor profile" and change the working and output color spaces to ARGB or ProPhoto instead of the default sRGB.
-
Bob, I have just had a look at Raw Therapee and it looks rather good, thanks for the info :)
Dave
Before you get settled on Raw Therapee, I suggest that you try Photo Ninja for raw conversions. The ease of use and the quality of the output are both far better than RT, IMO. I say this having just spent the past two days running numerous head to head comparisons. Whenever I hear people raving about or recommending Raw Therapee, I scratch my head and wonder "why?" I think that some people fall in love with open-source software, because they like the idea of it (and it is free), which I appreciate, but in the end, the software has to be judged on its own merits.
Rob
-
That's just too funny for words.
You do realize that a Macbook Pro was recently found to be the top performing Windows laptop, right? I run Mac OS 10.8 and Windows 8 on my iMac (mostly for testing IE for web development).
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57581290-37/macbook-pro-declared-best-performing-windows-laptop/
-
^ Or Wintel computers run Mac OS better than Apple comuters. It's all in your point of view. It's conceivable that Apple could lock out Windows with a hardware or firmware design change, if they chose to do so. Something to think about in these increasingly mean times. Kind of like they way they killed Adobe Flash, not as if that will raise any sympathy these days. Will continue to use PC's, since I'm not religious (http://www.t3.com/news/apple-causes-). :)
-
^ Or Wintel computers run Mac OS better than Apple comuters. It's all in your point of view. It's conceivable that Apple could lock out Windows with a hardware or firmware design change, if they chose to do so. Something to think about in these increasingly mean times. Kind of like they way they killed Adobe Flash, not as if that will raise any sympathy these days. Will continue to use PC's, since I'm not religious (http://www.t3.com/news/apple-causes-). :)
Oh please! Get over it. ::)
-
^ Or Wintel computers run Mac OS better than Apple comuters. It's all in your point of view. It's conceivable that Apple could lock out Windows with a hardware or firmware design change, if they chose to do so. Something to think about in these increasingly mean times. Kind of like they way they killed Adobe Flash, not as if that will raise any sympathy these days. Will continue to use PC's, since I'm not religious (http://www.t3.com/news/apple-causes-). :)
Speculation can be fun but revisionist history is another matter ... Yes, Steve Jobs came down against using a Flash player on mobile devices ... and we don't have a flash player for iOS because of that spat and that Adobe never really came up with one (so that even cut out the jail breakers) ... though that could boil down to the chicken or the egg conundrum ...
However, Flash has NEVER been "killed" for OS X ... While it is no longer pre-installed, Apple has done nothing to prevent it from being installed and used. I know the Flash plugin is on all my OS X machines ... use it every day. If Flash is dead or dying, it's not necessarily due to Apple or Steve Jobs ... it's because of HTML5 and now all those aspiring, young web designers won't have to pay a king's ransom to Adobe for Flash CSx (or CC) to get on the playing field.
I could see a time when Apple may not be inclined to offer an in-house, easy solution to run multiple OS brands ... but a full fledged lock out? ... of course it's possible ... but at this point in time, I don't think it's very probable ... Either way, as we have learned this week ... it is always prudent not to put all your eggs in one basket ... After all, working with only a single software solution is about as smart as showing up to shoot a wedding with only one camera ... bad things are sure to happen before you are finished.
-
Oh please! Get over it. ::)
I did! And it only took 6 months of deconditioning! :)
ANYWAY
Hey Rob, thanks for that tip on Photo Ninja! Easily worth the price. The noise reduction alone is worth it. Would have no trouble losing LR for that. Miles ahead of Raw Therapee, and every bit as slick as LR, in a different way. Time invested in looking at this software is well spent.
The bad news...for those of you with D5200's (and maybe also D7100's), it did not handle those raw formats very well at all. OTOH, D800 raws look fabulous, possibly the best raw conversions I have seen of my test files.
-
I've got a copy of Snow Leopard Server set up inside Mountain Lion as a VM to address this problem with a couple of other legacy apps, but have managed to move on anyway.
FWIW, I've partitioned my main drive so that I can use Snow Leopard as the main OS, and Lion (or whatever) on the second partition. Easy to switch back and forth, with both having full access to the other drives.
Also use Parallels for Windows, Linux, etc.
-
Before you get settled on Raw Therapee, I suggest that you try Photo Ninja for raw conversions. The ease of use and the quality of the output are both far better than RT, IMO. I say this having just spent the past two days running numerous head to head comparisons. Whenever I hear people raving about or recommending Raw Therapee, I scratch my head and wonder "why?" I think that some people fall in love with open-source software, because they like the idea of it (and it is free), which I appreciate, but in the end, the software has to be judged on its own merits.
Rob
Thanks for the tip about Photo Ninja...
-
I did! And it only took 6 months of deconditioning! :)
ANYWAY
Hey Rob, thanks for that tip on Photo Ninja! Easily worth the price. The noise reduction alone is worth it. Would have no trouble losing LR for that. Miles ahead of Raw Therapee, and every bit as slick as LR, in a different way. Time invested in looking at this software is well spent.
The bad news...for those of you with D5200's (and maybe also D7100's), it did not handle those raw formats very well at all. OTOH, D800 raws look fabulous, possibly the best raw conversions I have seen of my test files.
Bill,
Glad you like Photo Ninja. In my book, it is easily the best of the current crop of raw convertors. I think that if more people try it, they will not fret about the possibility of losing ACR. Just spend the time learning the presets and the adjustment tools. The D5200 and D7100 are not listed as PN supported cameras, so, I suggest that you write to Picture Code (the two programmers who created PN), and they will be more than happy to add support. The same holds true for any other camera that is not yet covered. The Picture Code people are very responsive and helpful.
Rob
-
Speaking of OSX on a PC, nobody's mentioned Hackintosh yet ;-). My point is, where there is a will, there is a way. And no I haven't built one, but I like having the option should it ever become necessary.
-
You do realize that a Macbook Pro was recently found to be the top performing Windows laptop, right? I run Mac OS 10.8 and Windows 8 on my iMac (mostly for testing IE for web development).
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57581290-37/macbook-pro-declared-best-performing-windows-laptop/
It was the comment about being locked in to Windows only that I was referring to. You're locked into very little with Windows because it's a fairly flexible OS, unlike the Apple OS which is very tightly locked down. Not unlike the differences between iOS and Android.
-
It was the comment about being locked in to Windows only that I was referring to. You're locked into very little with Windows because it's a fairly flexible OS, unlike the Apple OS which is very tightly locked down. Not unlike the differences between iOS and Android.
I use Photoshop, Lightroom 4, InDesign, Premiere, Aperture, the Nik Collection, Cubase, and all the other plugins and software I could ever need. How exactly am I tightly locked down with a Mac? Macs run Windows with simple software while PCs are locked down with Windows unless one is handy with building gear.
Apple bashing is boring and so '90s. Time to get back on topic.
Sal
-
Apple bashing is boring and so '90s.
Same as MS bashing.
It is more a matter of preference and personal history.
In line with the "anti-greedy-corporate" comments that have been posted against Adobe, one might expect OS flame-wars to be between OSX/Windows on one side, and Linux on the other. I don't get why we need something like Windows/OSX to run something like Photoshop (games might be something else since they seems to depend on updated/optimized graphics driver support from hardware manufacturers). Is it color management, OS visual appeal or the chicken-and-egg problem?
-h