Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Digital Image Processing => Topic started by: designpartners on July 29, 2013, 05:24:37 pm
-
any update on this? it's been 2 months..
http://blogs.adobe.com/photoshopdotcom/2013/05/creative-cloud-were-listening.html (http://blogs.adobe.com/photoshopdotcom/2013/05/creative-cloud-were-listening.html#comments)
I haven't seen much since and I'm trying to put in place a budget for the coming year..
Thanks
James
-
Still "listening", apparently. I'd think they would have had an earful by now, and frankly the same sort of comments have been flying around since CC was announced last year, so this can't have been unexpected.
The introductory pricing has been extended to August 31, 2013, so you have an extra month for that, if you're interested.
I use PS CS6 Standard, so the introductory cost for Photoshop CC alone is about the same as I've been paying for my normal upgrades. But after a year, the price doubles. And if I stop paying, I lose access to the program and have to revert back to what I have now. It really doesn't make much sense for me to subscribe. Given that I would already have upgraded to CS7 if I could have, the Cloud is saving me money!
-
I have browsed though the article and also read random comments below it.
Very few of the comments left are positive.
I wonder if all the guys who left negative comments "dislike Adobe" for some strange reason... or whether they are just formerly happy customers who do not like the direction the company has recently been taking?
Most evidence point to the latter I would think.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Most evidence point to the latter I would think.
Cheers,
Bernard
I suspect strongly that you are right.
Eric M.
-
so I suppose not really listening at all then...
hmmmmmm.
Thanks
James
-
Or just waiting to see who blinks first?
One interesting move is the year's CC subscription for all Photoshop World attendees (http://scottkelby.com/2013/get-photoshop-cc-and-12-months-of-the-full-adobe-creative-cloud-free-when-you-register-for-photoshop-world/). Apparently it's a life subscription if you're seen laughing at Scott's jokes.
John
-
any update on this? it's been 2 months..
http://blogs.adobe.com/photoshopdotcom/2013/05/creative-cloud-were-listening.html (http://blogs.adobe.com/photoshopdotcom/2013/05/creative-cloud-were-listening.html#comments)...
One of the more interesting comments was posted last week:
Sam Lightman says:
Listen up, kiddies, here’s the real skinny on CC. When you want to find out what a company is really thinking, as opposed to what it’s telling its customers, go to its investor relations site. Specifically, if you go to this link:
http://wwwimages.adobe.com/www.adobe.com/content/dam/Adobe/en/investor-relations/PDFs/ADBE-IR-Presentation-June%202013.pdf (http://wwwimages.adobe.com/www.adobe.com/content/dam/Adobe/en/investor-relations/PDFs/ADBE-IR-Presentation-June%202013.pdf)
You will discover that so-called @home/individuals compose 50% of its customer base but only – wait for it – 10% of its revenue base. The rest is corporate or institutional. So if they dispense with us @home/individuals, they eliminate a ton of support expenses and sales costs at a cost of only 10% of their revenue. So this is what they are doing; they are throwing us under the bus and assuming that the shortfall will be more than made up by the increases in revenue from the remaining subscribers, most of whom are corporate and can pay the license fees indefinitely, no matter how high they rise in the future.
So every time one of us screams, NO WAY am I gonna rent my software, etc., Adobe breathes a silent Amen, scratches another @home/individual off its list and focuses its efforts more tightly where the money is.
So…don’t expect Adobe to listen to our software-rental beefs with much interest. We are not where the money is. The company is perfectly okay with us going elsewhere.
It’s a new world, folks. Corporations rule, customers are dispensable, and individuals are really just road kill on the highway to higher profits.
-
One of the more interesting comments was posted last week:
One of the more interesting comments was posted last week:
I hadn't seen that, but we actually are a company.. not a huge number of licenses, we would probably buy 40 right now if we could.. but currently we have I think 27 ish..
I posed on another post.. http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=78151.msg627986#msg627986
_______________________
"in general, we've upgraded every 2 releases. we certainly see the advantage of upgrades, but we have to balance costs.
so.. the last time we upgraded from CS 3 to CS5, I think it cost us about €15k (it may have been €18k I can't remember) -so annualized, it's maybe 5-6k.. a very manageable amount of money.
the thing is, almost none of us use just 1 program, a lot of us use PS, AI and ID on a daily basis. design standard was the ideal package for the majority of us, and we expanded where needed.
I certainly understand the benefit of the full master suite - I'd love to have it.. but.. not everyone in our team need it.. you can buy the individual licences but, it's not really viable to do it for 3 individual licenses per user.
quickly doing the math - even just for 25 CC licences (which isn't enough for us) - €61 per user per month, that's 61*12*25 - that comes to €18k per year!
now to make things worse, instead of getting a discount for buying 25 licenses, they introduce "teams"... so instead of paying €61 per month, it's €86!!! so that's 86*12*25 - that's almost €26,000 per year!!!
I like centrally managed licenses, I don't need 100gb of online storage.
so that goes from an annualized cost of €6k per year to €26k per year..
I know they have an introductory offer - I don't care about that.. that's only 1 year in what I hope is a long company future.
and we're growing.. increasing our number of users.. but at this price... well.. we will be looking long and hard at alternatives..
so I'd argue, Adobe hasn't got the first clue about the SME Pro market.. "
_________
huge price difference.. and that's just for 25 licenses.. I can't imagine the cost for large enterprises.. it must be unsustainable..
-
Adobe is listening. They are listening to the clink of the coin of the realm into the corporate cash drawer coffers. That is their mission for the stock holders. The outcome for us will depend upon the curtailment of the clinking or its continuation.
-
Adobe is listening. They are listening to the clink of the coin of the realm into the corporate cash drawer coffers. That is their mission for the stock holders. The outcome for us will depend upon the curtailment of the clinking or its continuation.
In fact this is a bit too simplified a view for a leading corporation like Adobe, and I am sure they know it full well.
There are many more things they need to be listening to in order to ensure continued success for their stockholders.
Those include user satisfaction, generic image of the company,...
Also, we should not forget that corporate clients of Adobe are run by people who have the potential to be individual customers and form their opinion about a B2B/B2C company like Adobe also from what they read on the web.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
In fact this is a bit too simplified a view for a leading corporation like Adobe, and I am sure they know it full well.
There are many more things they need to be listening to in order to ensure continued success for their stockholders.
Those include user satisfaction, generic image of the company,...
Obviously there are many considerations that should be taken into account for Adobe's continued success. Not a few firms have failed to regard their customer's perception of them, failed to understand where their new customers come from, etc.
Could Adobe's strategy be successful enough in the short run to blind them of the future? Or, may they be taking the correct course with CC? Certainly it is important to keep them appraised of our, i.e. amateur and smaller pro operations, thoughts in the hope they will rethink the strategy. However, if enough money flows, reverting to licensed packages will be a difficult decision.
-
One of the more interesting comments was posted last week:
Quote
Sam Lightman says:
Listen up, kiddies, here’s the real skinny on CC. When you want to find out what a company is really thinking, as opposed to what it’s telling its customers, go to its investor relations site. Specifically, if you go to this link:
http://wwwimages.adobe.com/www.adobe.com/content/dam/Adobe/en/investor-relations/PDFs/ADBE-IR-Presentation-June%202013.pdf
You will discover that so-called @home/individuals compose 50% of its customer base but only – wait for it – 10% of its revenue base. The rest is corporate or institutional. So if they dispense with us @home/individuals, they eliminate a ton of support expenses and sales costs at a cost of only 10% of their revenue. So this is what they are doing; they are throwing us under the bus and assuming that the shortfall will be more than made up by the increases in revenue from the remaining subscribers, most of whom are corporate and can pay the license fees indefinitely, no matter how high they rise in the future.
So every time one of us screams, NO WAY am I gonna rent my software, etc., Adobe breathes a silent Amen, scratches another @home/individual off its list and focuses its efforts more tightly where the money is.
So…don’t expect Adobe to listen to our software-rental beefs with much interest. We are not where the money is. The company is perfectly okay with us going elsewhere.
It’s a new world, folks. Corporations rule, customers are dispensable, and individuals are really just road kill on the highway to higher profits.
I think that probably sums up the whole situation pretty well :(
Dave
-
That seems to be a fair analysis. There was a conference call for analysts at the time that results went out where the CEO admitted that they were going to lose a huge chunk of their customers. Since there must be some scale economies in this business, the overheads will be being spread over a smaller customer base, which means lower profits or increased prices. Revenue per subscriber is the number that the analysts will be looking at.
-
That seems to be a fair analysis. There was a conference call for analysts at the time that results went out where the CEO admitted that they were going to lose a huge chunk of their customers. Since there must be some scale economies in this business, the overheads will be being spread over a smaller customer base, which means lower profits or increased prices. Revenue per subscriber is the number that the analysts will be looking at.
And how were you privy to this conference call for analysts, jrp? Do you have a link to a reliable source so we can all read it for ourselves?
You should hang out here more often, jrp. You're absence makes us wonder about you.
I mean where did all these people come from that responded ONLY to the CC subscription topic threads on this site and then just disappeared after the threads lost steam? Hard to believe they've only been lurkers all these years.
-
The conference call for analyst transcripts are readily available direct from Adobe, NASDAQ, etc.
For example, here http://news.cnet.com/8301-1001_3-57589987-92/adobe-ceo-were-off-to-a-good-start-with-subscriptions-q-a/?part=rss&tag=feed&subj=News-BusinessTech (http://news.cnet.com/8301-1001_3-57589987-92/adobe-ceo-were-off-to-a-good-start-with-subscriptions-q-a/?part=rss&tag=feed&subj=News-BusinessTech) you will find:
At your Max conference in May, you said you had an installed base of 10 million people. What fraction of them will go subscriptions?
Narayen: We hope to see 4 million by 2015. We like to understand what it would take to attract more customers. Those are the public targets we set.
-
And how were you privy to this conference call for analysts, jrp? Do you have a link to a reliable source so we can all read it for ourselves?
You should hang out here more often, jrp. You're absence makes us wonder about you.
I mean where did all these people come from that responded ONLY to the CC subscription topic threads on this site and then just disappeared after the threads lost steam? Hard to believe they've only been lurkers all these years.
?
-
There was a conference call for analysts at the time that results went out where the CEO admitted that they were going to lose a huge chunk of their customers.
And how were you privy to this conference call for analysts, jrp? Do you have a link to a reliable source so we can all read it for ourselves?
I don't think Adobe's CEO actually says anywhere that they are deliberately losing a chunk of their customers. He talks about gaining new ones, and in that CNET interview the CEO says "We don't want to leave a single customer behind", presumably with a straight face. In published financial documents, Adobe talk in revenue terms - losing one revenue stream and replacing it with another. See their investor relations page (http://www.adobe.com/investor-relations.html) and particularly the analysts briefing slides (http://wwwimages.adobe.com/www.adobe.com/content/dam/Adobe/en/investor-relations/PDFs/AdobeMAXFABriefingSlides6May2013.pdf) from slide 25 onwards. Some can infer that revenue means customers, but that's not much more than prejudice/anger speaking.
-
Some can infer that revenue means customers, but that's not much more than prejudice/anger speaking.
I don't think anyone here would think Adobe actively want to loose customers, the annoyance is that they don't care much that their policies will loose some. No one likes realising that their hard earnt money is unimportant to someone else.
-
Quoted above from elsewhere - "So this is what they are doing; they are throwing us under the bus and assuming that the shortfall will be more than made up by the increases in revenue from the remaining subscribers, most of whom are corporate and can pay the license fees indefinitely, no matter how high they rise in the future."
Said by participants above: "I think that probably sums up the whole situation pretty well', "That seems to be a fair analysis."
-
Another downside to this besides all us photographer types being pushed under the wheels of the bus, is that if 50% of their customer base were home users and small businesses, then these were also probably the vast majority of the people who bought the books and videos and learning materials etc to learn how to use Adobe's products, because corporate users will have their own in-house training materials and trainers. So in effect Adobe are also throwing a lot of the third party and associated training businesses, authors, publishers and online training sites etc, etc, under the same bus.
But hey ho, it is their business and they can do with it as they please and push forward whatever ideas they want to push forward in the quest to maximise profits, even if it does mean lots of little people getting their fingers burnt – because as the old saying goes, business is business.
I just wonder if in the long run, it is going to be good business, having alienated so many people by doing this?
Dave
-
Another downside to this besides all us photographer types being pushed under the wheels of the bus, is that if 50% of their customer base were home users and small businesses, then these were also probably the vast majority of the people who bought the books and videos and learning materials etc to learn how to use Adobe's products, because corporate users will have their own in-house training materials and trainers. So in effect Adobe are also throwing a lot of the third party and associated training businesses, authors, publishers and online training sites etc, etc, under the same bus.
Hi Dave,
That's exactly, although in other words, one of the things I've said earlier. The collateral damage, and indirectly to the promotion of Adobe, is not to be underestimated (and their analysts probably (conveniently, because it's hard to estimate, or it was ignored) missed that aspect).
"But hey ho, it is their business and they can do with it as they please and push forward whatever ideas they want to push forward in the quest to maximise profits, even if it does mean lots of little people getting their fingers burnt – because as the old saying goes, business is business.
I just wonder if in the long run, it is going to be good business, having alienated so many people?
Indeed.
Cheers,
Bart
-
Another downside to this besides all us photographer types being pushed under the wheels of the bus, is that if 50% of their customer base were home users and small businesses, then these were also probably the vast majority of the people who bought the books and videos and learning materials etc to learn how to use Adobe's products, because corporate users will have their own in-house training materials and trainers. So in effect Adobe are also throwing a lot of the third party and associated training businesses, authors, publishers and online training sites etc, etc, under the same bus.
But hey ho, it is their business and they can do with it as they please and push forward whatever ideas they want to push forward in the quest to maximise profits, even if it does mean lots of little people getting their fingers burnt – because as the old saying goes, business is business.
I just wonder if in the long run, it is going to be good business, having alienated so many people by doing this?
Dave
I guess if this customer base actually upgraded on a regular basis and generated revenue for Adobe, then they would not have even thought of alienating them. Obviously, this single photog customer just was not producing revenue for Adobe. Why should a company continue to spend money on customers that don't spend money on the company? I'm sure Adobe would not have to look at different revenue streams if their current streams provided the revenue to keep the company profitabl.
-
Obviously, this single photog customer just was not producing revenue for Adobe. Why should a company continue to spend money on customers that don't spend money on the company?
Hi,
That's where the 'analysis' fails! As a person who was successfully involved in marketing (BTW marketing is not the equivalent to sales, as many seem to believe), for many years, I can say that there are many more elements to be considered, though it may hurt the brain of some of the 'participants' of this thread.
I'm sure Adobe would not have to look at different revenue streams if their current streams provided the revenue to keep the company profitabl.
As the customary disclaimer goes: "past performance is no guarantee for the future"...
Cheers,
Bart
-
Hi,
That's where the 'analysis' fails! As a person who was successfully involved in marketing (BTW marketing is not the equivalent to sales, as many seem to believe), for many years, I can say that there are many more elements to be considered, though it may hurt the brain of some of the 'participants' of this thread.
R
As the customary disclaimer goes: "past performance is no guarantee for the future"...
Cheers,
Bart
So you jump in and drop a bunch of nothing, claiming others are not up to your standards...talk about BS. Please stoop down and enlighten us with this marketing wisdom you posses that a large corporation like Adobe does not. You seem to think pretty highly of yourself.
-
...As a person who was successfully involved in marketing (BTW marketing is not the equivalent to sales, as many seem to believe), for many years, I can say that there are many more elements to be considered, though it may hurt the brain of some of the 'participants' of this thread.
...
Exactly! "Sales" is building a product and convincing people they want/need it. "Marketing" is researching what customers want and then crafting a product that fulfills those desires and needs.
-
So if they dispense with us @home/individuals, they eliminate a ton of support expenses and sales costs at a cost of only 10% of their revenue.
From the complaints about Adobe customer service and tech support I've read online from 2001 to the present, just last month I finally found out from someone posting over at Photo.net that Adobe's customer service strategy employs a three tier hierarchal system that refers each customer issue according to the level of complexity. That's got to be tough to budget for.
I can't even remember the one time I had to call Adobe customer service or tech support over an issue since PS4 in '98 all the way up to CS5 which I don't even use now. Back then I had Illustrator 8, Pagemaker 6.5 and PS4 and they all worked just fine on Mac OS 8, but then I wasn't using them to run a business.
Geez! Just remembered. Even the Twain plugin for my Agfa Arcus II flatbed worked in PS4 while everyone else seemed to be having trouble with their own scanner model.
-
I don't think anyone here would think Adobe actively want to loose customers, the annoyance is that they don't care much that their policies will loose some. No one likes realising that their hard earnt money is unimportant to someone else.
There are 2 aspects to consider:
- The lack of interest of Adobe for additional income that could have been generated by individuals/small businesses,
- The money those people have spent in the past with Adobe products based on the - now proven false - premise that Adobe's products were worth investing in (from a monetary, time, knowledge, IP,... standpoint).
The decision of Adobe is not just about telling us "we are not interested in your cash", it also says "we don't consider your past contribution worthy of respect".
In my view, this conveys a very negative message because the same line of thought could very well apply in the future to those corporate customers currently being targeted by Adobe. Adobe could come up with a new line of software generating more revenue and tell their current customers, sorry we have decided to stop investing in PS because we have found something more profitable to do... They may not get much advanced notice... we didn't get much advanced notice.
At least, it does force their large customers to add the credibility of Adobe as a reliable long term software vendor to their list of risks to managed. A low risk for now, but it used to be a zero risk.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
So in effect Adobe are also throwing a lot of the third party and associated training businesses, authors, publishers and online training sites etc, etc, under the same bus.
Maybe not. At least one entity and their followers are being enticed to join the CC fold.
http://tinyurl.com/l6qlo95
-
I don't think anyone here would think Adobe actively want to loose customers, ...
No, of course not. But they have consciously adopted a policy that even they think will reduce their customers / subscribers by 60%. I don't know how this will affect their costs, as they seem to be attaching a greater premium to the certainty of recurring revenue streams than to cost reduction, but if their costs are unaffected, then the effective price for subscribers will have to more than double to retain existing levels of profitablity.
An alternative explanation is that they don't really believe that their customer base will shrink that drastically, and want in future to be able to surprise the market on the upside. The (silent) extension of the reduced rental rate deadline to end-August suggests to me that they are not being overwhelmed with takers. We'll find out at their next quaterly results.
-
Maybe not. At least one entity and their followers are being enticed to join the CC fold.
Hi,
They are trying to entice as many people as possible to get signed up (even for free), if only until December 31st when the investors will be asking how the market response was to the new sales model. Has the promised 2013 goal been met? Time is ticking away, and the uptake may be slower than anticipated/hoped for, so expect some more surprising moves.
Their main goal is to get as many people signed up before year end!
Cheers,
Bart
-
Hi,
They are trying to entice as many people as possible to get signed up (even for free), if only until December 31st when the investors will be asking how the market response was to the new sales model. Has the promised 2013 goal been met? Time is ticking away, and the uptake may be slower than anticipated/hoped for, so expect some more surprising moves.
Their main goal is to get as many people signed up before year end!
Cheers,
Bart
So I think what you are saying here Bart, is that if people are tempted to dip their toes into the CC waters for free for the first year, or try it out due to the lower introductory offer price, even though they may have no intention of continuing with their CC subscriptions after that, that they will in fact be boosting Adobe's apparent subscriber numbers in the first year sufficiently, to ensure that the subscription/rental model continues to be the only option that is ever available in the future?
So if you are against the idea of subscribing/renting Photoshop or any other Adobe product going forward, then you shouldn't even try it out for free, as you will then be actively contributing towards making the subscription/rental option the only option that is ever going to be available.
A bit of a catch 22 for a lot of people who don't want to subscribe, but also want to keep up to date with their software?
But do we really think that the people running Adobe have thought so deeply and fiendishly about this and come up with such a plot, that allows them to so easily grasp all their customers by the family jewels and make them their profit puppets? (Cue sinister Hammer House of Horror type laughter in the background) Because from everything that I read about Adobe lately, seems to indicate that the management stumble around aimlessly from one bad idea to another, but with profit continuing to be a lucky consequence of doing so, even though they wouldn't be able to find their own arse with an arse seeking missile.
???
Dave
-
So I think what you are saying here Bart, is that if people are tempted to dip their toes into the CC waters for free for the first year, or try it out due to the lower introductory offer price, even though they may have no intention of continuing with their CC subscriptions after that, that they will in fact be boosting Adobe's apparent subscriber numbers in the first year sufficiently, to ensure that the subscription/rental model continues to be the only option that is ever available in the future?
Hi Dave,
Yes, that's how I see things.
So if you are against the idea of subscribing/renting Photoshop or any other Adobe product going forward, then you shouldn't even try it out for free, as you will then be actively contributing towards making the subscription/rental option the only option that is ever going to be available.
That's one consideration. Another would be that Adobe will come up with a sort of solution to the lock-out when payments stop, i.e. a purchase of a license for the product as it was at the time of contract termination (perhaps with a discount based on the length of the prior subscription period). But they won't do that unless forced by the circumstances.
As it looks currently, one could subscribe for just a single month, do a lot of work, and terminate the use of the software for a while, till a number of months later. That will save the user money, and he/she will be fully up to date with the latest features when subscribing for another odd month. I'm sure Adobe will try to prevent that scenario from unfolding, e.g. by significantly raising the price for single month subscriptions (they will sell that as a 'discount' for annual commitment, but that is of course the normal price level).
A bit of a catch 22 for a lot of people who don't want to subscribe, but also want to keep up to date with their software?
Sure, but are we talking about wants or needs? In the case of wants, one should act strategically and wait till next year. Not a problem for those who already purchased a perpetual licence for CS6. In case of needs, well, encouraging Adobe in their behavior is the price to pay.
But do we really think that the people running Adobe have thought so deeply and fiendishly about this and come up with such a plot, that allows them to so easily grasp all their customers by the family jewels and make them their profit puppets?
I don't know about what others think, but that's not a strange scenario for big business, IMHO of course. Some customers may stay on board, and others will leave (empty handed).
Cheers,
Bart
-
Maybe not. At least one entity and their followers are being enticed to join the CC fold.
http://tinyurl.com/l6qlo95
Offering a FREE one year FULL subscription to PS World Conference attendees? I'm floored, too! That's quite a coup for Scott Kelby and his hobbyist following. I'm sure his ego seriously outgrew his waist measurement with that news.
So it looks like Adobe is seeking amateur photographer dollars for CC membership. What a laugh. Sadly, Adobe has turned a once highly-respected company into a marketing mess, a public relations fiasco, managing to anger a large percentage of its most loyal user base.
I went to a fun party last week that had a few famous (younger) photographers as guests. None of them knew what was happening at Adobe. They had no idea that the license model had been dropped. (Apparently, a lot of people pay no attention to the news.) I couldn't help but think there's more anger to come.
-
Offering a FREE one year FULL subscription to PS World Conference attendees? I'm floored, too! That's quite a coup for Scott Kelby and his hobbyist following. I'm sure his ego seriously outgrew his waist measurement with that news.
So it looks like Adobe is seeking amateur photographer dollars for CC membership. What a laugh. Sadly, Adobe has turned a once highly-respected company into a marketing mess, a public relations fiasco, managing to anger a large percentage of its most loyal user base.
I went to a fun party last week that had a few famous (younger) photographers as guests. None of them knew what was happening at Adobe. They had no idea that the license model had been dropped. (Apparently, a lot of people pay no attention to the news.) I couldn't help but think there's more anger to come.
in fairness to what Scott and his team pulled off it's pretty amazing.... and.. from Adobes point of view, the extra number that they get from photoshop world wouldn't register as a blip on their figures, so I think it was them doing something nice and probably buying some good will in the process.
-
probably buying some good will in the process.
Good will for whom?
What happens when the year is up and the credit card fees for a FULL CC version start appearing on the monthly statements of Kelby's hobbyist customers? Honestly, what percentage of Kelby followers truly need a FULL version of CC?
What does this say about all the other Adobe gurus/evangelists (and their customers) who have been promoting Adobe products for the past decade or two? How do you define INSULT?
IMO, this is nothing more than a blatant numbers game. In spite of what anyone thinks of him, Kelby has built the largest empire of potential customers. And Adobe looks desperate for some of those numbers in the wake of their PR disaster.
-
good will for all... at the end of the day, it's not unreasonable for a company to offer a trial of a product and after that trial ends you can't use it any more. And.. most company's give a 30 day trial, Adobe gave a 365 day trial for these attendees.. that's a pretty nice gesture to be fair..
as for the evangelists, well, I'm sure the reality is that they have little or no influence over what the company does, so take it as an insult if you wish....
and of course it's a numbers game, they are a business, I don't begrudge that, I begrudge the lack of a choice and the massive hike in annual price.
Finally, I HUGELY admire what the Kelby media team have accomplished, not just with Photoshop world, but look at the training available for a tiny price! World class pro's giving away years of experience. I genuinely wish them all the success in the world.
James
-
Offering a FREE one year FULL subscription to PS World Conference attendees? I'm floored, too! That's quite a coup for Scott Kelby and his hobbyist following. I'm sure his ego seriously outgrew his waist measurement with that news.
So it looks like Adobe is seeking amateur photographer dollars for CC membership. What a laugh. Sadly, Adobe has turned a once highly-respected company into a marketing mess, a public relations fiasco, managing to anger a large percentage of its most loyal user base.
I went to a fun party last week that had a few famous (younger) photographers as guests. None of them knew what was happening at Adobe. They had no idea that the license model had been dropped. (Apparently, a lot of people pay no attention to the news.) I couldn't help but think there's more anger to come.
Sounds a bit like the dealers handing out free Crack at the school gates to me...
-
IMO, this is nothing more than a blatant numbers game. In spite of what anyone thinks of him, Kelby has built the largest empire of potential customers. And Adobe looks desperate for some of those numbers in the wake of their PR disaster.
I am a professional retoucher. Just for stuff and giggles, I decided to drop 99 bucks in '07 to attend one of his Photoshop seminars in Boston when I was living and working in Saratoga Springs, NY. Good excuse to drive over and see Boston, a cool city, for the day. I walked into a room filled with maybe 300 people, and thought, wtf? Who are these people? 300 retouchers within even a 100 mile radius from Boston?? Maybe an equivalent area in NYC metro, but, not Boston. Turns out half were serious amateurs, and the rest were wedding and portrait photographers. No way could you assemble actual, day to day professional retouchers in that quantity in the same room even if you paid them 99 bucks each. His market is just barely professional. The seminar/presentation/dog and pony show taught me nothing, other than there are 300 people in the Boston area who are very interested in Photoshop.
Finally, I HUGELY admire what the Kelby media team have accomplished, not just with Photoshop world, but look at the training available for a tiny price! World class pro's giving away years of experience. I genuinely wish them all the success in the world.
I don't. I find the man very irritating, and quite the self promoter. His podcasts from a few years ago are unwatchable. Scott, you're a nerd, and not funny. Cut to the chase, please, and stop tying to humor me. Tell me something I don't know.
I learn absolutely nothing from him. I do admire his skills in building what seems to be a a successful business, though. Gotta hand it to him for that, I guess.
-
I am a professional retoucher.
I don't. I find the man very irritating, and quite the self promoter. His podcasts from a few years ago are unwatchable. Scott, you're a nerd, and not funny. Cut to the chase, please, and stop tying to humor me. Tell me something I don't know.
I learn absolutely nothing from him. I do admire his skills in building what seems to be a a successful business, though. Gotta hand it to him for that, I guess.
but you are a professional retoucher... if he was teaching you something you didn't know I would suggest that you were not a very good professional retoucher...
he makes this stuff accessible to amateurs.. I personally am an amateur photographer, and for someone who is learning, in my option, what he offers is invaluable!
now if there was someone who claimed to be able to teach me in 1 day more about what I do for a living, guaranteed, I too would learn nothing ;)
and if you find him annoying.. fine.. go watch Dan Margulis, Calvin Hollywood, David Cuerdon, Ben Willmore, Glyn Dewis, Joel Grimes, John Paul Caponigro et al...
James
-
One day is a start. I would expect at least one little thing I could use after I walk away. I don't expect a full course for 99 bucks, but, at least stop with the bad jokes.
And those other people won't help you much, either. I'm skeptical of most of these people who are good at marketing themselves. But, as I said, I respect the ambition, sort of.
-
One day is a start. I would expect at least one little thing I could use after I walk away. I don't expect a full course for 99 bucks, but, at least stop with the bad jokes.
And those other people won't help you much, either. I'm skeptical of most of these people who are good at marketing themselves. But, as I said, I respect the ambition, sort of.
I think you just misjudged the the effort ... write it off as a loss as your own mistake for having made an attempt to learn something that was beneath your level of expertise ...
I mean ... after all ... how much would a "professional" retoucher expect to gain for a $99 investment ????
-
On another note ... I was invited to participate in an Adobe survey about CC this week ... I found the survey curiously interesting ... It seemed the styling and order of the questions was more akin to marketing the product or a sales pitch, rather than seeking out why a customer would not desire to purchase the product ... Once again, it looks to be an effort of Adobe questioning my ability to reason out an offer, as compared with their prevalent attitude that they know best what and how I should be investing my hard-earned cash ... Apparently they seem to be incapable to understand that I do not deem them worthy of perpetual payment just so I can click my mouse as needed ...
The survey seemed much more a conveyance to convince me I am wrong not to accept the offering, rather than to discover why so many traditional users aren't flocking to the Cloud.
I guess they can't fathom that I have spent the past four decades honing my skills precisely to avoid the need for the Camera Shake tool and don't consider it a "must-have" asset ... silly me I guess ...
-
Any chance you could copy and paste the survey text up here for the rest of to look at and ponder?
Thanks :)
Dave
-
I mean ... after all ... how much would a "professional" retoucher expect to gain for a $99 investment ????
You'd be surprised. Sometimes I learn very valuable techniques for free. And, on the other hand, I have sat through one to two day courses my employers have bought for me that were a total waste of time.
Photoshop instruction (well, most academics, but, we won't go there right now) is a business created to make some people a lot of money. Their inspiration, I'm afraid, is not to necessarily educate the public.
-
And how were you privy to this conference call for analysts, jrp? Do you have a link to a reliable source so we can all read it for ourselves?
You should hang out here more often, jrp. You're absence makes us wonder about you.
I mean where did all these people come from that responded ONLY to the CC subscription topic threads on this site and then just disappeared after the threads lost steam? Hard to believe they've only been lurkers all these years.
We're still herre... Amazed by how Adobe assumes that they can get rid of individuals and keep corporates. Wait, were have we seen this play before? Think, think...
But this discussion is boring.
. Adobe is not listening
. Few Adobe "friends" defend their misguided strategy in forums
. Most Adobe users are outraged
What's new?
-
From the complaints about Adobe customer service and tech support I've read online from 2001 to the present, just last month I finally found out from someone posting over at Photo.net that Adobe's customer service strategy employs a three tier hierarchal system that refers each customer issue according to the level of complexity. That's got to be tough to budget for.
I can't even remember the one time I had to call Adobe customer service or tech support over an issue since PS4 in '98 all the way up to CS5 which I don't even use now. Back then I had Illustrator 8, Pagemaker 6.5 and PS4 and they all worked just fine on Mac OS 8, but then I wasn't using them to run a business.
Geez! Just remembered. Even the Twain plugin for my Agfa Arcus II flatbed worked in PS4 while everyone else seemed to be having trouble with their own scanner model.
I remember calling Adobe support... For a licensing issues. The licensing manager stopped working, and i had to escalate the issue to be resolved.
Isn't that ironic? Pirates don't need to call Adobe to fix their licensing isssues, I bet.
-
I signed up for the cloud. I use only LR, PS and acrobat at the moment. For LR I have a normal license at the moment. I plan on doing some video work for video catalogues so am currently exploring video editing software. Downloaded Premier and Aftereffects to help with that.
I am a one man business but the subscription service suits me. It costs me per month the price of one pack shot. I shoot hundreds of the things a month so the cost for the power of the applications is peanuts.
I also like the incremental improvement idea. The big changes every 2 years were quite disruptive to me.
Purchasing, downloading, registering and all the rest went smoothly. No need for support so far.
-
Snip> I mean where did all these people come from that responded ONLY to the CC subscription topic threads on this site and then just disappeared after the threads lost steam? Hard to believe they've only been lurkers all these years.
Some of us do lurk here quite a bit, it's a good place to find out what's going on but personally I don't find it a very friendly forum.
Unless you are using the most expensive equipment, preferably medium or large format, and talk like an "Artist" you don't seem to be taken very seriously IMO.
I tend to come here for information but prefer the social aspects of other places.
-
I mean where did all these people come from that responded ONLY to the CC subscription topic threads on this site and then just disappeared after the threads lost steam? Hard to believe they've only been lurkers all these years.
Hard to believe or not, does it make any difference ? Just a sign of the universal sense of 'outrage' at Adobe's attitude.
-
Interesting to see that the introductory CC rental price offer for CS users that was due to end in July, then in August, has been extended, without fanfare, to December. Sounds like they are not having as much luck as they anticipated in persuading people to convert. Unsurprising, irrespective of the price / contract terms, as there are no compelling new features in [Photoshop] CC. Let's see what use they make of the new-found freedom to introduce new features outside major updates.
-
Interesting to see that the introductory CC rental price offer for CS users that was due to end in July, then in August, has been extended, without fanfare, to December.
I think there is a big reason there is no fanfare ... Either CC isn't selling as well as they had hoped, or it is selling so well, Adobe is attempting to entice even more folks int the fold ... Personally, if traditional perpetual license customers haven't jumped on the discounted price point for the first year by now, I doubt they will do so in any significant numbers by year's end ... Adobe has extended the offer twice now and not pulled the deal ... One would think, if CC is surpassing expectation, Adobe would be promoting that point in a significant way with their marketing.
I'm quite interested to see the numbers from the current quarter in the next report ... It will be interesting to see if all is going as Adobe planned.
-
I predict in ten years most photographers will not use Photoshop. They will use third-party full-featured programs instead. Has anyone noticed that Topaz Labs is slowly morphing into Photoshop?
-
I think there is a big reason there is no fanfare ... Either CC isn't selling as well as they had hoped, or it is selling so well, Adobe is attempting to entice even more folks int the fold
When something is selling well, most companies try to increase the price point... especially when a special discount with a clearly defined timeframe is involved.
So there is 99% chance that CC is not selling as well as they expected.
Since they were apparently not expecting it to sell very well short term anyway, odds are it is not selling well at all.
There is no reason to be particularly happy about this. Adobe is a key supplier of the photography world and we can only wish their continued success.
They have the option every day that passes by to revert their decision and come up with a boxed version of CS7 if they feel that CC is threatening their top line. Of course, the longer it takes, the higher the odds that some of us really settle with the alternative software providers we have been evaluating for months...
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Where do you see that the $9.99 deal has been extended to December? When I open the site, the on;y deal i see that has been extended is CC for teams @ $49.99 until 12/3. Individual plans come up @ $19.99 for single app for me. Not that it matters. I won't sign up either way.
-
Must admit, I've been surprisingly impressed by PhotoLine, ( www.pl32.com ) the web site doesn't look much but don't be put off giving it a free trial, the software is amazing.
-
I predict in ten years most photographers will not use Photoshop. They will use third-party full-featured programs instead. Has anyone noticed that Topaz Labs is slowly morphing into Photoshop?
I hate to say it, because it's painful, but in the long run it may be a good thing that we are having to wean ourselves from Photoshop.
I'm just glad I lived to experience it (and LightRoom) at its peak.
-
Must admit, I've been surprisingly impressed by PhotoLine, ( www.pl32.com ) the web site doesn't look much but don't be put off giving it a free trial, the software is amazing.
Yep, it is not at the level of UI refinement of CS6, but it works very well.
I am glad I invested in Photoline the budget I had set adode for LR5.0 upgrade.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Today's keynote should be interesting..
http://scottkelby.com/2013/dont-miss-adobes-keynote-today-streamed-live-from-las-vegas/
-
Since it's Photoshop World, they'll probably announce that Photoshop/Lightroom subscription bundle that they've heard photographers want.
-
Since it's Photoshop World, they'll probably announce that Photoshop/Lightroom subscription bundle that they've heard photographers want.
...that they've heard from both of the photographers on the paid Adobe staff.
-
They'll probably announce that Photoshop/Lightroom subscription bundle that they've heard photographers want.
Yup, $9.99 until the end of the year
http://blogs.adobe.com/creativelayer/introducing-the-photoshop-photography-program/
Plus demos of LR on an iPad and other mobile related fluff.
-
$9.99 pm for LR, PS, Behance and online storage all together and not just as an intro price but permanent.
So it's a lot cheaper, but still rental.
I watched the live broadcast and it seemed to me that all I was hearing was one click this and one click that and instant uploading of everything from your connected device to the entire planet, because apparently everything connected to photography these days needs to be like instagram - in my mind, fine art photography has nothing to do with instagram and one click this, that or the other.
I can see why Adobe are going down this route, they need to keep competitive, but I wonder if they are actually helping to undermine the quality of more serious work, by assuming that all we need is a one click solution to everything.
Dave
-
Yup, $9.99 until the end of the year
http://blogs.adobe.com/creativelayer/introducing-the-photoshop-photography-program/
To be clear, it is the offer that is available until the end of the year.
-
To be clear, it is the offer that is available until the end of the year.
anyone know if permanent means the price per month will never go up?...having lost faith in adobe management, i'd look for this to be explicit in the monthly contract...
anyone know how much it will be for us in europe? 10 euros a month? More?...probably more...
-
To be clear, it is the offer that is available until the end of the year.
Ah, so it's not permanent, although that was the impression I got when he announced it, and does the bundling of LR into this 'Photographers' package, mean that LR is now also going to only be available through a CC subscription option going into the future?
Dave
-
Ah, so it's not permanent, although that was the impression I got when he announced it, and does the bundling of LR into this 'Photographers' package, mean that LR is now also going to only be available through a CC subscription option going into the future?
Dave
Dave, as I understand the deal ... the $9.99 (US) is permanent (at least as far as we can take the presenter's word) however, the offer to get in on the deal expires at year's end. In other words ... sing up by Dec. 31, 2013 and you are locked in to the package price ... wait until Jan. 1, 2014 and you miss out on the opportunity ...
Lr has been available in the whole-package CC subscription for some time now ... not available for single app subscription.
-
anyone know if permanent means the price per month will never go up?...having lost faith in adobe management, i'd look for this to be explicit in the monthly contract...
anyone know how much it will be for us in europe? 10 euros a month? More?...probably more...
Once you take advantage of the offer, then that is your base price as long as you maintain your subscription. It is possible that prices may rise in the future, but, this is not like the other offers where the price rises to the regular price after a year.
Hope that helps...
mike chambers
mesh@adobe.com
-
Ah, so it's not permanent, although that was the impression I got when he announced it, and does the bundling of LR into this 'Photographers' package, mean that LR is now also going to only be available through a CC subscription option going into the future?
Dave, there are no plans at present to make Lr available through a subscription-only model.
-
anyone know if permanent means the price per month will never go up?
It would naive in the extreme to think anything will remain a constant price.
-
To be clear, it is the offer that is available until the end of the year.
But we don't know the value of the "offer".
Maybe that particular package will be no longer an option ? Maybe the price will go up for that combination of products ? Maybe a whole different strategy of subscription offers will be made.
-
Once you take advantage of the offer, then that is your base price as long as you maintain your subscription. It is possible that prices may rise in the future, but, this is not like the other offers where the price rises to the regular price after a year.
Hope that helps...
mike chambers
mesh@adobe.com
Hi Mike and thanks for that quick reply.
You know and we know, that the real issue is the "locked in" aspect of the Adobe CC product range that is upsetting and frightening most people away from jumping onto the CC bandwagon, so even though I do realise that Adobe has been listening to some extent, I still don’t think you have listened to us as much as we would have liked you to. What people are saying to Adobe is this, I am more than happy to give you the equivalent of $120 a year, or perhaps even more, but in exchange all I want is the security of knowing that I can use PS without having to balance on the edge of the 'no pay, no use' precipice licensing model that Adobe seems hell-bent on pushing everyone into.
I sincerely thank you and all the people at Adobe for coming up with this revised plan and I am sure if you had launched CC with this pricing structure, then we would have all been more likely to swallow it whole and without too much said against it, but as it now stands, I think people have built up a lot of resentment towards being forced to rent their software, so it is probably going to be too little too late for a lot of people.
It really is a crying shame how Adobe have handled this whole affair and how they have so undermined the trust of so many of their loyal photographic user base - I love Photoshop (yes I do mean LOVE) and I think that is where Adobe went wrong, because you (Adobe) didn't realise how passionate it’s photographic users were, you didn't realise that PS is so much more than a piece of software to a lot of photographers, it is something as coveted to them as an expensive lens or camera would be, we are passionate about the kit we own, our hobby, our profession and our obsession and that is what Adobe did not and still does not understand it seems.
Dave
-
+1
-
*You know and we know, that the real issue is the "locked in" aspect of the Adobe CC product range
*all I want is the security of knowing that I can use PS without having to balance on the edge of the 'no pay, no use' precipice *people have built up a lot of resentment towards being forced to rent their software,
*how they have so undermined the trust of so many of their loyal photographic user base - I love Photoshop (yes I do mean LOVE)
*you didn't realise that PS is so much more than a piece of software to a lot of photographers, it is something as coveted to them as an expensive lens or camera would be, we are passionate about the kit we own, our hobby, our profession and our obsession and that is what Adobe did not and still does not understand it seems.
Very eloquently put, Dave.
I would only add that since the CC announcement, I get the distinct impression that photographers are looking at other alternatives. Yesterday I would have 'jumped' at the revised offer, today I'm only 'thinking' about it. Dependency, like addiction, is not a healthy condition.
Can but hope that Adobe, in their wisdom, will eventually remove the 'locked out' catch and see fit to 'freeze' one's licence after a minimum subscription period, say 3 years.
---
Just saw Eric Chan's post #43 in 'Adobe has blinked'.
quote
On the other hand, in terms of being able to view and use your images, there is an indirect exit strategy: Lightroom. Lr is offered as a perpetual product, so it will continue to run should you choose to end your subscription. Lr can also read and convert TIFFs and PSDs. There are limits, of course: you can't directly edit the internals of the document, such as smart objects, adjustment layers, masks, etc.) But you can still convert to other formats (e.g., export as a new TIFF), print them, etc.
unquote
Well that's refreshing as long as the LR perpetual licence holds. AFAIK, Adobe has only said that there are currently 'no plans' to change the licensing model. Go on Adobe, implement a 3-year exit strategy and we can all go back to photography ...
ps And give subscribers an option to 'pre-pay' upfront. I don't need or want to add any more credit-card hiccups to my workflow!
-
Hi Mike and thanks for that quick reply.
You know and we know, that the real issue is the "locked in" aspect of the Adobe CC product range that is upsetting and frightening most people away from jumping onto the CC bandwagon, so even though I do realise that Adobe has been listening to some extent, I still don’t think you have listened to us as much as we would have liked you to. What people are saying to Adobe is this, I am more than happy to give you the equivalent of $120 a year, or perhaps even more, but in exchange all I want is the security of knowing that I can use PS without having to balance on the edge of the 'no pay, no use' precipice licensing model that Adobe seems hell-bent on pushing everyone into.
I sincerely thank you and all the people at Adobe for coming up with this revised plan and I am sure if you had launched CC with this pricing structure, then we would have all been more likely to swallow it whole and without too much said against it, but as it now stands, I think people have built up a lot of resentment towards being forced to rent their software, so it is probably going to be too little too late for a lot of people.
It really is a crying shame how Adobe have handled this whole affair and how they have so undermined the trust of so many of their loyal photographic user base - I love Photoshop (yes I do mean LOVE) and I think that is where Adobe went wrong, because you (Adobe) didn't realise how passionate it’s photographic users were, you didn't realise that PS is so much more than a piece of software to a lot of photographers, it is something as coveted to them as an expensive lens or camera would be, we are passionate about the kit we own, our hobby, our profession and our obsession and that is what Adobe did not and still does not understand it seems.
Dave
Spot on...
My photography is an investment in time and effort and that includes a significant amount of post production work. The idea of being locked out of access to that work and that includes the post production work preserved in a non destructive layered workflow, is abhorrent to many photographers I talk to.
-
Once you take advantage of the offer, then that is your base price as long as you maintain your subscription. It is possible that prices may rise in the future, but, this is not like the other offers where the price rises to the regular price after a year.
Hope that helps...
mike chambers
mesh@adobe.com
Hi Mike…yes and no…once again the language adobe uses is not clear. Base price, as you've explained it, means nothing about future price increases. As Rhossydd points out, 'it would be naive in the extreme to think anything will remain a constant price'. The adobe saga continues. now it's 10 dollars a month to start without the 'guarantee' that it will be 20 after the first year. Still, year two could be 20 or 25 dollars a month. It could be more.
I'll wait till the offer is released mid to late september. Try and make sense of the adobe 'language'. See how much a month it will cost me in euros. 15 euros a month, 180 a year, every year, with ever increasing prices is too much.
Like many others, I no longer trust adobe. That is why I search for some clarity in any of the announcements. Man oh man, Adobe could use a good public relations firm. But wait, it doesn't seem that adobe wants to speak clearly to the customer. The number of shifts in pricing and policy in the last year or two is just amazing.
It's a slippery slope all you employees at adobe are facing. I wish you all the best. How long before they lower the guillotine (I currently live in France), and start shedding talent because the subscription model no longer needs the level of innovation or day to day care to keep the software up to date, bug-less, etc.? How long before the shareholders want job cuts to increase their profits?
I'm currently not tied to any company or client base. I can use the software I want to use, so long as it does the job I need. I'm now testing Photoline. I'm going to try Capture 1 and aperture in the months to come with the intention of dropping Lightroom.
Renting my work tools is still a negative proposition for me. Greed from adobe. No choice. The 'our way or the highway' hard sell. Not for me. I wish I didn't have to search for alternatives. I've used Photoshop for around 23 years. I'm a long time customer. I'm loving Lightroom too. Adobe no longer wants me as a customer. It's pretty clear.
kind regards to you and welcome to the forums...
-
mike chambers' clarification is helpful.
I don't know what "base price" means (as distinct from monthly rent) but we are still seem to be being invited to sign up for a pig in a poke: Adobe can choose to increase its prices at any time while we have limited exit strategies.
If the offer was $9.99 in perpetuity that would be a different proposition entirely.
The blog says "To be clear, $9.99 is not an introductory price. It is the price for those of you who sign up by December 31, 2013." It turns out that this is actually completely unclear. To be clear, it should add "... until such time as we choose to increase the price." (in which case the $9.99 is, of course, introductory or initial).
Similarly, when the FAQ says that "This means you get all the benefits of a Creative Cloud single-app membership for Photoshop CC, but with Lightroom 5 included as well, for about half the monthly price." it should add "until such time as we choose to change prices."
This sort of equivocation is unhelpful.
-
Mike or Eric,
Is the copy of LR provided with this deal perpetual, or does it also go poof if one stops subscribing? I assume this offer requires a yearly commitment. This is the first time I have even been tempted by CC, and I'm weighing the cost of $80 for the LR5 upgrade (perpetual) to this deal.
Regards,
Lloyd
-
Is the copy of LR provided with this deal perpetual, or does it also go poof if one stops subscribing? I assume this offer requires a yearly commitment. This is the first time I have even been tempted by CC, and I'm weighing the cost of $80 for the LR5 upgrade (perpetual) to this deal.
Hi Lloyd, the copy of Lr that you get with this deal is a perpetual license. So you get to keep it if you stop subscribing. As you said, the offer does require a minimum 1-year commitment.
-
I don't know what "base price" means (as distinct from monthly rent) but we are still seem to be being invited to sign up for a pig in a poke: Adobe can choose to increase its prices at any time while we have limited exit strategies.
This is where things get difficult. As I wrote in another thread recently, basically Adobe is saying the standard ongoing price for this deal will be 9.99/mo. The current plan is to keep the price there indefinitely, but Adobe is also not guaranteeing it'll stay at that price forever.
-
Hi Lloyd, the copy of Lr that you get with this deal is a perpetual license. So you get to keep it if you stop subscribing. As you said, the offer does require a minimum 1-year commitment.
This is definitely a good deal. I subscribed to the $10/month upgrade subscription hoping the rent would remain at $10. This is very good. I cannot really see where the problem is for anyone who does the math correctly, especially when taking into account the real costs of the other pieces of equipment most users of Photoshop use.
-
Once you take advantage of the offer, then that is your base price as long as you maintain your subscription. It is possible that prices may rise in the future, but, this is not like the other offers where the price rises to the regular price after a year.
Hope that helps...
mike chambers
mesh@adobe.com
Hi Mike
thanks for your helpful comments since the announcement of this limited offer (but ongoing pricing). A question that you havent answered is pricing outside the US. Those of us who live outside have the adobe site send us to subsidary regional websites to "optimise" the experience (excuse my non-US spelling)and there is no mention of this deal there (just the usual much higher rates even allowing for exchange rates). The "cloud" is all about increasing connectivity improving the customer experience etc isnt it, not perpetuating regional pricing strategies? Can you give us a breakdown on that please as I now cant even get back to the US product support page now adobe's site recognises my "location" on this computer.
BTW perpetual LR5 and a 12 month look at what enhancement PS CC will have over CS5/LR4 I already have is a reasonable deal for a US$120 commitment by installment, and then it comes down to proof of value to continue at $9.95 per month or part as happy for the experience (provided the PS perpetual is not in some way disabled/nullified etc)
-
Hi Mike and thanks for that quick reply.
You know and we know, that the real issue is the "locked in" aspect of the Adobe CC product range that is upsetting and frightening most people away from jumping onto the CC bandwagon ...
+1.
This "locked in" aspect is the only reason I don't already have a subscription. It makes features, innovation, and nearly everything else, irrelevant. The fact that Adobe has no defined and palatable exit strategy from a subscription is ample motivation to look for one now, while CS6 is still viable. If such an exit strategy existed I'd hope to never use it, but like insurance it would be available if needed. No one knows what will happen to Adobe's pricing, and no one knows what events in life might affect their ability to pay. What everyone knows is that they don't want to lose use of their works in progress, more or less immediately, if such events occur. There should at least be a buffer, as we now have with CS6, to allow time to transition files to some other workflow. Allowing the most recent version to continue operating without any updates after 3 or 4 years of subscribing is an example of a palatable exit strategy. I'm sure there are others.
-
Hi Mike…yes and no…once again the language adobe uses is not clear. Base price, as you've explained it, means nothing about future price increases. As Rhossydd points out, 'it would be naive in the extreme to think anything will remain a constant price'. The adobe saga continues. now it's 10 dollars a month to start without the 'guarantee' that it will be 20 after the first year. Still, year two could be 20 or 25 dollars a month. It could be more.
We have no plans to change the prices. However, I can imagine at some point in the future, prices may change (either up or down). For example, in 30 years, I would imagine the price might be different (this is the same for just about anything else).
mike chambers
mesh@adobe.com
-
Hi Mike
thanks for your helpful comments since the announcement of this limited offer (but ongoing pricing). A question that you havent answered is pricing outside the US. Those of us who live outside have the adobe site send us to subsidary regional websites to "optimise" the experience (excuse my non-US spelling)and there is no mention of this deal there (just the usual much higher rates even allowing for exchange rates). The "cloud" is all about increasing connectivity improving the customer experience etc isnt it, not perpetuating regional pricing strategies? Can you give us a breakdown on that please as I now cant even get back to the US product support page now adobe's site recognises my "location" on this computer.
Just a quick fyi, but we are updating the FAQ for the offer today, and it should include international prices. Ill try and remember to post here once it has been updated.
mike chambers
mesh@adobe.com
-
mike chambers' clarification is helpful.
I don't know what "base price" means (as distinct from monthly rent) but we are still seem to be being invited to sign up for a pig in a poke: Adobe can choose to increase its prices at any time while we have limited exit strategies.
If the offer was $9.99 in perpetuity that would be a different proposition entirely.
The blog says "To be clear, $9.99 is not an introductory price. It is the price for those of you who sign up by December 31, 2013." It turns out that this is actually completely unclear. To be clear, it should add "... until such time as we choose to increase the price." (in which case the $9.99 is, of course, introductory or initial).
Similarly, when the FAQ says that "This means you get all the benefits of a Creative Cloud single-app membership for Photoshop CC, but with Lightroom 5 included as well, for about half the monthly price." it should add "until such time as we choose to change prices."
This sort of equivocation is unhelpful.
'equivocation'...thanks jrp, that's a good word, that's what i've been hearing/reading from adobe for a while now...it feels intentional, 'keep 'em confused, some may sign up without realizing what they're getting into'...
-
We have no plans to change the prices. However, I can imagine at some point in the future, prices may change (either up or down). For example, in 30 years, I would imagine the price might be different (this is the same for just about anything else).
Funny you should mention that, Mike.
In the UK, there was, for want of a better phrase, a 'membership custom' where on joining a club your annual membership fee was fixed in perpetuity. So a club I joined 30 years ago, today still debits my credit card with the original £5.00. Today new members, pay a somewhat higher fee, something in excess of £600.00 . This had the double advantage of not only keeping the earlier members on board, even if they don't still use the facilities today, AND creating a stress-free love-in between management and their client base.
In the words of Jeff Schewe,
Just sayin' ...
-
There's something that nobody else seems to be mentioning and it's that for the first time UK + US prices seem to be equivalent [+local tax] when it comes to the PS + LR deal . Now I'm sure an awful lot of people would like that to be the case for all of Adobe's offerings, so is the full CC going to match US prices too for those in countries outside of the US Mike?
-
We have no plans to change the prices. However, I can imagine at some point in the future, prices may change (either up or down). For example, in 30 years, I would imagine the price might be different (this is the same for just about anything else).
I can understand that, mike, but I do not think that it is quite the same for just about anything else. My mobile phone subscription is for a fixed period with fixed terms (although some phone companies have tried to increase prices mid-contract on the specious grounds that they were improving things for the subscriber). At the end of the term I can take up a new contract with the same company at whatever terms are then on offer, or I can choose to contract with another company offering better terms. In this case there are no other companies to contract with if I want to retain full access to my files, so there is no competitive pressure to constrain Adobe's terms.
I don't doubt that Adobe has no present plans to increase prices, but things are changing all the time. Adobe could get taken over and the new owners / directors could take a different view.
This is not fanciful. If Adobe anticipates losing around half of its users by 2015 the lost of revenue must come from somewhere.
-
Just a quick fyi, but we are updating the FAQ for the offer today, and it should include international prices. Ill try and remember to post here once it has been updated.
mike chambers
mesh@adobe.com
The post has been updated with non-US pricing:
http://blogs.adobe.com/creativelayer/introducing-the-photoshop-photography-program/
mike chambers
mesh@adobe.com
-
The post has been updated with non-US pricing:
http://blogs.adobe.com/creativelayer/introducing-the-photoshop-photography-program/
mike chambers
mesh@adobe.com
Good on you Mike: we have some flat earth pricing (pretty much) which is welcome. Thanks from NZ
-
Mike, are the international prices for CC also going to be in line with US prices?
-
Good on you Mike: we have some flat earth pricing (pretty much) which is welcome. Thanks from NZ
It certainly is not flat pricing... Euro price is 31% higher then us, that over $3 extra per month!! We're based in Ireland, if we were in the UK, it would be 15% more than US, or 16% less than the rest of the EU...
Usual euro/dollar parity BS for us...
James
-
EU customers are being gently screwed again. 9.99 is a cute amount, but in euros (and exclusive of 21% tax), it's somewhat less cute. >:(
Here are the equivalents of €9.99 in other currencies at today's exchange rates:
AUD: 14:36 (PS price in local currency $9.99)
NZD: 16:55 (ditto)
USD: 13.11 (ditto)
GBP: 8.40 (PS price £7.14)
Jp¥: 1308.87 (PS price ¥1,000)
I'd love to see Adobe's justification for these price discrepancies.
-
EU customers are being gently screwed again. 9.99 is a cute amount, but in euros (and exclusive of 21% tax), it's somewhat less cute. >:(
Here are the equivalents of €9.99 in other currencies at today's exchange rates:
AUD: 14:36 (PS price in local currency $9.99)
NZD: 16:55 (ditto)
USD: 13.11 (ditto)
GBP: 8.40 (PS price £7.14)
Jp¥: 1308.87 (PS price ¥1,000)
I'd love to see Adobe's justification for these price discrepancies.
To be fair to Adobe, it's not just them that screws us, it's all software companies.. We spend a hell of a lot of money on software, we get screwed all the time.
I'm sure there justification for a price difference, no idea what it is or if it should be up or down, but it's absolutely not is exact parity on the euro/dollar exchange rate.
James
-
Hi Mike,
This may have been answered but I could not find it.
The $9.99 offer lists Photoshop CC and specifically LR5. What happens when LR5 is replaced by LR6? Do I have to pay the regular upgrade fee because this is a perpetual license? If this is so, as I already own LR5, if I go for this offer can I sell my current license?
Thanks
-
To be fair to Adobe, it's not just them that screws us, it's all software companies.. We spend a hell of a lot of money on software, we get screwed all the time.
I'm sure there justification for a price difference, no idea what it is or if it should be up or down, but it's absolutely not is exact parity on the euro/dollar exchange rate.
It seems that they're not great corporation tax payers either http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2007/10/30/adobe-paying-tax-at-in-ireland/ (http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2007/10/30/adobe-paying-tax-at-in-ireland/) at least in the EU and it would not surprise me if that was the case in the US too.
-
Hi Mike,
This may have been answered but I could not find it.
The $9.99 offer lists Photoshop CC and specifically LR5. What happens when LR5 is replaced by LR6? Do I have to pay the regular upgrade fee because this is a perpetual license? If this is so, as I already own LR5, if I go for this offer can I sell my current license?
Thanks
Yeah, this is confusing. When the new version of Lightroom comes out, lets call it Lightroom 6, as long as you are still a member of Creative Cloud, you will get Lightroom 6 (and 7, and 8, etc...). Same for Photoshop.
This is basically a Creative Cloud membership that includes Photoshop and Lightroom.
Hope that helps...
mike chambers
mesh@adobe.com
-
Adobe announced that they will be launching a Photoshop/Lightroom combo for $9.99 US per month offering. This looks ideal for those of us who haven't upgraded to version 5 yet
From the Adobe blog
http://blogs.adobe.com/creativelayer/introducing-the-photoshop-photography-program/
Since introducing Photoshop CC, we’ve listened to feedback from a spectrum of our customers, from advanced professionals to casual enthusiasts. One common request was a solution specifically tailored for photographers. We listened, and at Photoshop World we’re announcing a special offer for our loyal Photoshop customers. Beginning today, customers who own Photoshop CS3 or higher are eligible for a special Creative Cloud membership offer that includes all of the following for just $9.99/month:
Photoshop CC
Lightroom 5
20 GB of online storage
Behance ProSite
Access to Creative Cloud Learn’s training resources
Ongoing upgrades and updates
To be clear, $9.99 is not an introductory price. It is the price for those of you who sign up by December 31, 2013. And here is a list of prices for the major regions outside of the US – keep in mind that these prices are exclusive of VAT/local taxes which vary by country.
North America $9.99 USD
European Union €9.99 EUR
EMEA non-EU $9.99 USD
Australia/New Zealand $9.99 AUD
Asia Pacific $9.99 USD
Latin America $9.99 USD
Japan ¥1,000 JPY
UK £7.14 GBP
This offer will be available at the same time we introduce the new version of Lightroom 5.2 in a couple weeks. Visit the FAQ to learn more and follow Photoshop on Facebook, Twitter and Google+ to find out when the offer goes live.
-
Yeah, this is confusing. When the new version of Lightroom comes out, lets call it Lightroom 6, as long as you are still a member of Creative Cloud, you will get Lightroom 6 (and 7, and 8, etc...). Same for Photoshop.
This is basically a Creative Cloud membership that includes Photoshop and Lightroom.
Hope that helps...
mike chambers
mesh@adobe.com
That's what I was hoping so thanks for the confirmation. Perhaps if they replaced LR5 with LR CC in the slide it would be a little more clear.
Regards
-
Mike,
Thanks for posting information about Photoshop CC/LR. Your info has been helpful.
I have a question?
Just the end of last moth I renewed my subscription $49.99 after having the $29.99 deal for the past year.
If I would have known about this Photoshop/LR deal that was announced the other I would have gone for that since I really only need Photoshop/LR.
Will I be able to downgrade to this new deal? I do own a copy of Photoshop CS5 if that means anything.
Thanks in advance.
Stu
-
Yeah, this is confusing. When the new version of Lightroom comes out, lets call it Lightroom 6, as long as you are still a member of Creative Cloud, you will get Lightroom 6 (and 7, and 8, etc...). Same for Photoshop.
This is basically a Creative Cloud membership that includes Photoshop and Lightroom.
Hope that helps...
Sorry, but this leaves some confusion here.
So far we've been told all CC products cease to work when a subscription stops.
Where does LR, with it's perpetual licence model fit with that ?
Will the copy of LR that is subscribed to cease in the same way ? or will the subscription come with a working serial number for each of the next versions ?
If we get to, say, LR 7 and I decide that I don't need PS CC any more and cancel my subscription will LR7 continue to work in perpetuity and be independently upgradable ?
Sorry to be so pedantic, but these sort of issues matter a lot to the long term value of the offer.
-
Obviously you'd rather hear it officially, but you do get a proper version of Lightroom that continues to work after the end of the subscription. Will it allow you to get an upgrade on the next version of LR, not sure.
-
Sorry, but this leaves some confusion here.
So far we've been told all CC products cease to work when a subscription stops.
Where does LR, with it's perpetual licence model fit with that ?
Will the copy of LR that is subscribed to cease in the same way ? or will the subscription come with a working serial number for each of the next versions ?
If we get to, say, LR 7 and I decide that I don't need PS CC any more and cancel my subscription will LR7 continue to work in perpetuity and be independently upgradable ?
Sorry to be so pedantic, but these sort of issues matter a lot to the long term value of the offer.
There are two ways you can get Lightroom.
1. You can purchase a perpetual license. This does not provide access to future new versions of the software, although you will have any access to updates (i.e. 5.1, 5.2, etc...) of that software.
2. You can get Lightroom as part of a Creative Cloud membership. You have access to Lightroom, including future updates and versions as long as you continue to be a member of Creative Cloud.
This offer is a Creative Cloud offer. It is not a Photoshop CC subscription, with a perpetual license of Lightroom thrown in. It is a Creative Cloud subscription that includes Lightroom and Photoshop.
Hope that helps...
mike chambers
mesh@adobe.com
-
There are two ways you can get Lightroom.
1. You can purchase a perpetual license. This does not provide access to future new versions of the software, although you will have any access to updates (i.e. 5.1, 5.2, etc...) of that software.
2. You can get Lightroom as part of a Creative Cloud membership. You have access to Lightroom, including future updates and versions as long as you continue to be a member of Creative Cloud.
This offer is a Creative Cloud offer. It is not a Photoshop CC subscription, with a perpetual license of Lightroom thrown in. It is a Creative Cloud subscription that includes Lightroom and Photoshop.
Hope that helps...
mike chambers
mesh@adobe.com
I think the confusion is that back on page 4 Eric wrote
"Hi Lloyd, the copy of Lr that you get with this deal is a perpetual license. So you get to keep it if you stop subscribing. As you said, the offer does require a minimum 1-year commitment."
It's clear from what you are saying that this is a PS+LR CC subscription and that you would lose both if you stopped, rather then being able to keep LR (although I will be able to keep the LR5 I already have).
Thanks
-
It's clear from what you are saying that this is a PS+LR CC subscription and that you would lose both if you stopped, rather then being able to keep LR (although I will be able to keep the LR5 I already have).
Thanks
Yes. If you have purchased a perpetual license of Lightroom, then that will continue to work, even if you start and stop a Creative Cloud membership.
mike chambers
mesh@adobe.com
-
I owned a copy of Photoshop CS6 (as well as LR5) and I thought it was a reasonable deal to get access to all the Creative Cloud tools for £17.58 a month for oner year. So I signed up just before the 31st August deadline. This gives me a chance to play with some Adobe Products, for a year. Maybe expensive trials but 30 days is never enough. I would like to continue this for the year.
Now there is another offer, which as an enthusiastic amateur, really meets all my needs but ..... I have to sign up to that before the end of this year. If I don't I have no idea what I may have to pay for Photoshop and Lightroom when my first year CC deal ends. On the other hand I don't want duplicated tools and costs.
If you have any guidance Mike I would be very pleased to hear it.
-
I owned a copy of Photoshop CS6 (as well as LR5) and I thought it was a reasonable deal to get access to all the Creative Cloud tools for £17.58 a month for oner year. So I signed up just before the 31st August deadline. This gives me a chance to play with some Adobe Products, for a year. Maybe expensive trials but 30 days is never enough. I would like to continue this for the year.
Now there is another offer, which as an enthusiastic amateur, really meets all my needs but ..... I have to sign up to that before the end of this year. If I don't I have no idea what I may have to pay for Photoshop and Lightroom when my first year CC deal ends. On the other hand I don't want duplicated tools and costs.
If you have any guidance Mike I would be very pleased to hear it.
I owned a copy of Photoshop CS6 (as well as LR5) and I thought it was a reasonable deal to get access to all the Creative Cloud tools for £17.58 a month for oner year. So I signed up just before the 31st August deadline. This gives me a chance to play with some Adobe Products, for a year. Maybe expensive trials but 30 days is never enough. I would like to continue this for the year.
Now there is another offer, which as an enthusiastic amateur, really meets all my needs but ..... I have to sign up to that before the end of this year. If I don't I have no idea what I may have to pay for Photoshop and Lightroom when my first year CC deal ends. On the other hand I don't want duplicated tools and costs.
If you have any guidance Mike I would be very pleased to hear it.
You will be able to switch to the new photography plan once it is available. Once it is available, you will just need to contact Adobe customer support, and they can help switch you to the new program.
Right now, we don't have a solution if you want to switch to the new program in a year, when your current subscription expires (since the current photography offer expires at the end of this year).
Hope that helps...
mike chambers
mesh@adobe.com
-
I think the confusion is that back on page 4 Eric wrote
"Hi Lloyd, the copy of Lr that you get with this deal is a perpetual license. So you get to keep it if you stop subscribing. As you said, the offer does require a minimum 1-year commitment."
It's clear from what you are saying that this is a PS+LR CC subscription and that you would lose both if you stopped, rather then being able to keep LR (although I will be able to keep the LR5 I already have).
Thanks
I think this needs to be spelt out really clearly across the various threads (3+ I see) discussing this offer as I think Eric's well- intentioned post may have encouraged some ( me included) to thinking this was a short term (12 month min commitment ) offer worth pursuing if lr5 came out the end even if PSCC didn't provide ongoing advantages to justify ongoing subscription ( an eyes wide open paid for trial all parties in good faith etc). Personally no lr5 at the end = no interest. Why? Not because I want something for nothing but because I want perpetual software which I retire to new versions ( as I have done lr3 to lr4, cs3 to cs5, capture one 6 to 7) when I see the point, and I'm willing to give adobe a chance to show me the benefit of subscription based upgrades to the products it sees the future in doing so for a limited time, but it will be the benefits ( ie value add) that will determine that and whether i chose to go on for longer. after all I am still paying for the 12+ months it's not free.
Mike Chambers, maybe the FAQ needs to be 100% clear as many comments (Eric's included) may have confused this if I take it that you are the Adobe font of truth on this forum. :)
-
I think this needs to be spelt out really clearly across the various threads (3+ I see) discussing this offer as I think Eric's well- intentioned post may have encouraged some ( me included) to thinking this was a short term (12 month min commitment ) offer worth pursuing if lr5 came out the end even if PSCC didn't provide ongoing advantages to justify ongoing subscription ( an eyes wide open paid for trial all parties in good faith etc). Personally no lr5 at the end = no interest. Why? Not because I want something for nothing but because I want perpetual software which I retire to new versions ( as I have done lr3 to lr4, cs3 to cs5, capture one 6 to 7) when I see the point, and I'm willing to give adobe a chance to show me the benefit of subscription based upgrades to the products it sees the future in doing so for a limited time, but it will be the benefits ( ie value add) that will determine that and whether i chose to go on for longer. after all I am still paying for the 12+ months it's not free.
Mike Chambers, maybe the FAQ needs to be 100% clear as many comments (Eric's included) may have confused this if I take it that you are the Adobe font of truth on this forum. :)
Thanks. Ill pass it on to the team.
I think the issue is that we have said in the past, that Lightroom will remain available as a perpetual license. I also think some people may read that as Lightroom will ONLY be available via a perpetual license. As I posted above, it is available as a subscription as part of CC, and is also available as a perpetual license.
So, the Photography program we have been discussing is a Creative Cloud program, and the software you have access to (Photoshop / Lightroom) is available as long as you remain a member of Creative Cloud.
mike chambers
mesh@adobe.com
-
So, the Photography program we have been discussing is a Creative Cloud program, and the software you have access to (Photoshop / Lightroom) is available as long as you remain a member of Creative Cloud.
So let's be clear about this:
This PS+LR 'photography' deal is a "Creative Cloud" deal and anything you rent will not be usable once you cease the subscription.
So there's a now a subscription version of LR that won't come with a perpetual licence.
If you drop the subscription you'll just be left with whatever you used before the commitment ? eg CS4 & LR3
Correct ?
-
So there's a now a subscription version of LR that won't come with a perpetual licence.
Yes. This isnt new, as Lightroom has been available as part of a full Creative Cloud subscription since Lightroom 4.
If you drop the subscription you'll just be left with whatever you used before the commitment ? eg CS4 & LR3
Correct ?
That is correct. As I posted above, the Photography program we have been discussing is a Creative Cloud program, and the software you have access to (Photoshop / Lightroom) is available as long as you remain a member of Creative Cloud.
mike chambers
mesh@adobe.com
-
You will be able to switch to the new photography plan once it is available. Once it is available, you will just need to contact Adobe customer support, and they can help switch you to the new program.
Right now, we don't have a solution if you want to switch to the new program in a year, when your current subscription expires (since the current photography offer expires at the end of this year).
Hope that helps...
mike chambers
mesh@adobe.com
Your explanation helps me to understand where things stand but "Right now, we don't have a solution" doesn't really help very much. Any chance you can come up with a solution before the end of the year? It is nearly four months away and a reasonable solution shouldn't be too difficult.
Peter
-
Mike Chambers, Are you able to comment on the rather fluid meaning of '9.99', according to where one lives?
-
Mike Chambers, Are you able to comment on the rather fluid meaning of '9.99', according to where one lives?
I am not sure what you mean. We have updated the original blog post with Non-US pricing:
https://blogs.adobe.com/creativelayer/introducing-the-photoshop-photography-program/
mike chambers
mesh@adobe.com
-
Mike
If you stop subscribing, does Lightroom stop working? There's inconsistency between what you just said and Eric's comments.
John
-
I am not sure what you mean. We have updated the original blog post with Non-US pricing:
https://blogs.adobe.com/creativelayer/introducing-the-photoshop-photography-program/
mike chambers
mesh@adobe.com
Yes, Mike, I know that. I posted above about the fact that customers in the EU have to pay some 20 to 30% more than customers in the rest of the world. That is what I'd like you to comment on. How does Adobe explain the discrepancy in pricing for the very same service?
-
Yes, Mike, I know that. I posted above about the fact that customers in the EU have to pay some 20 to 30% more than customers in the rest of the world. That is what I'd like you to comment on. How does Adobe explain the discrepancy in pricing for the very same service?
Ahh, no, I dont have any information on that.
mike chambers
mesh@adobe.com
-
Mike
If you stop subscribing, does Lightroom stop working? There's inconsistency between what you just said and Eric's comments.
John
unless you have a perpetual LR license on top of that... or I 'd assume you can stop subscription and buy perpetual license right away for LR
PS: and Schewe was feeding is FUD quite sometime ago that Adobe has accounting nightmares when code is available under both licenses... LR is (and so is ACR codebase, because it is shared) and no issues in account dept.
-
PS: and Schewe was feeding is FUD quite sometime ago that Adobe has accounting nightmares when code is available under both licenses... LR is (and so is ACR codebase, because it is shared) and no issues in account dept.
Well, you still don't have it right. ACR falls under Photoshop's accounting. As such, when hosted in Photoshop CC, ACR 8.x will continue to get new features when they are ready and released as part of the subscription. ACR 8.x hosted under a Photoshop CS6 perpetual license will not get new features, only new cameras and profiles. But ACR's code is small enough (and Thomas is smart enough) that revenue recognition isn't a big problem because Adobe doesn't sell Camera Raw as a product–in effect it has no real revenue.
Lightroom is still being developed under a perpetual license development accounting–even if it's available in CC packages. As such, after the LR 5.2 upgrade (which does get a couple of new features), LR 5.3+ will not get new features until the release of Lightroom 6. If you have the photo CC package, you'll get an upgrade to LR 6 when it ships.
Both of these are relatively small potatoes for Adobe when compared to all the apps currently found in the CC.
-
Once you take advantage of the offer, then that is your base price as long as you maintain your subscription. It is possible that prices may rise in the future, but, this is not like the other offers where the price rises to the regular price after a year.
Hope that helps...
mike chambers
mesh@adobe.com
Mike,
First of all thanks for your inputs - hopefully at the end of the day (year) we can all make informed decisions. However, while your words of "that is your base price as long as you maintain your subscription" are encouraging that is not what I am reading in Adobe's FAQs, which states "When you purchase directly from Adobe, the cost of an annual membership will not go up during the first 12 months of your membership. It is possible that the cost of the month-to-month membership will increase, but if it does, you will be notified and given the opportunity to cancel". That is clearly stating that Adobe has the right to limit this to a 12 month trial and after 12 months Adobe has the right to increase my monthly cost (with the right to cancel). That is not very encouraging!
Dave
-
This offer is a Creative Cloud offer. It is not a Photoshop CC subscription, with a perpetual license of Lightroom thrown in. It is a Creative Cloud subscription that includes Lightroom and Photoshop.
Thanks for the clarification.
I'll stick to the perpetual licence version of Lightroom then. I can happily live without PS CC.
Money saved.
-
Mike
If you stop subscribing, does Lightroom stop working? There's inconsistency between what you just said and Eric's comments.
John
unless you have a perpetual LR license on top of that... or I 'd assume you can stop subscription and buy perpetual license right away for LR
Sorry, I was asking Mike, not seeking others' assumptions. He subsequently gave a clear answer here:
Yes. If you have purchased a perpetual license of Lightroom, then that will continue to work, even if you start and stop a Creative Cloud membership.
John
-
I think that the only problem with continuing to use (or reverting to) an old perpetual licence version of Lightroom or ACR will come if you change your camera at some later date and the new Raw file format is not compatible with your software.
-
I think that the only problem with continuing to use (or reverting to) an old perpetual licence version of Lightroom or ACR will come if you change your camera at some later date and the new Raw file format is not compatible with your software.
Hi,
That's why I've never liked the idea of an image editor being dependent on a specific version of a Raw-converter. Having to update one's image editor to allow the use of a Rawconverter makes things unnecessarily complex and expensive for end-users.
Raw conversion and image editing are two very different operations, and they could in the vast majority of cases be handled independently, if designed properly.
Cheers,
Bart
-
Well... In this digital world we are all "chasing the technology." Like it or not it is true. In fact, as a hobbyist that has been part of the fun - seeing ever increasing image quality, flexibility and possibility.
How many of us are using the same cameras we used even three years ago? The same versions of any software from five years ago? Look at the FOR SALE section and add up the first page's asking prices. Deduct that from what we all paid retail and the cost of "owning" your gear will make the cost of "renting" your software look like mana from heaven. It is all semantics, IMO.
For me, the new CC Photographer's package is a bargain, even WHEN the price will rise over time (just like every other freaking thing on the planet). Not having to think about keeping ACR, PS & LR versions in synch is a nice plus for me too.
I had initially the same "I want to own, not rent" reaction. As I looked at my history of upgrades over the last decade, and how many pages of version numbers, product keys, etc. I have in my notes - well, it kinda made the distinction a little moot.
As I chase the technology, get new gear over time, and enjoy even greater image quality, flexibility, and possibility - the software (rental or not) will remain a very key component and still the cheapest part of the equation by a huge margin. So, for me at least, after looking at the "big picture" I came to the conclusion that while I'd rather have Adobe pay me to use their software that probably wasn't going to happen and that the value using their products represents, as a percentage of my total expenditure on "photography," is the most cost effective part of it. One man's opinion.
Oh, and my fingernails don't turn yellow from using Adobe like they did when I used Kodak. ;D
Rand
-
...
I had initially the same "I want to own, not rent" reaction. As I looked at my history of upgrades over the last decade, and how many pages of version numbers, product keys, etc. I have in my notes - well, it kinda made the distinction a little moot.
...
It's not so much a preference for owning software over renting it that is the issue. It's that if you stop renting you can no longer continue to work with the files you created. Of course that's not really new. In my negative files there are some B&W images that look just right when printed on Agfa Brovira graded paper. Want to make a new print today that looks the same? Lot's o' luck! Got a great slide shot in 1975 you want to make into an exhibition print using the dye-transfer process? Used to be any big city had a professional color lab where you could go. These days professional labs are scarcer then hen's teeth. Ctein bought up the worlds last supplies of dye-transfer materials and I believe they have now been used up, so no more dye-transfer prints are possible from any source. Okay, let's try Cibachrome instead - again, materials no longer made. Those really are similar situations to what folks will encounter when they stop paying their rental fees to Adobe.
-
Those really are similar situations to what folks will encounter when they stop paying their rental fees to Adobe.
Exactly. Things change over time. But, we have it better these days in that we can export and archive our work as tiffs, at least. But we're still stuck using "somebody's" software, right? Unless you can write your own?
And let's be honest here. Anyone out there using the Photoshop / ACR 1.x version you originally bought and "owned?" Anyone out there who has never upgraded? Anyone out there ever have firm plans to absolutely stop at PSx and never upgrade no matter what improvements might come in the future? Anyone out there who decided to just keep using your current camera forever since getting a new one would require you to "buy the latest version" of software that supports it? Let's get real. The reality is that all these elements in the advance of digital photography are interrelated and interdependent.
There are real issues related to archiving, permanence and access to files as it relates to the flow of history in the world of photography - but those issues exist irrespective of "rent or own" anyone's software. Heck, "digital photography" as we know it might someday be replaced with some other imaging technology that represents an even more radical change than the analog-to-digital paradigm shift.
Rand
-
There are two ways you can get Lightroom.
1. You can purchase a perpetual license. This does not provide access to future new versions of the software, although you will have any access to updates (i.e. 5.1, 5.2, etc...) of that software.
2. You can get Lightroom as part of a Creative Cloud membership. You have access to Lightroom, including future updates and versions as long as you continue to be a member of Creative Cloud.
This offer is a Creative Cloud offer. It is not a Photoshop CC subscription, with a perpetual license of Lightroom thrown in. It is a Creative Cloud subscription that includes Lightroom and Photoshop.
It is not my intent to throw cold water on what I think is a sincere attempt by Adobe to address the concerns of photographers, but ...
I have subscribed to Photoshop under the $9.99 single application offer, and at the same time upgraded Lightroom to the perpetual license Lightroom 5, with the intention to continue upgrading the perpetually licensed Lightroom. Under this scenario, I was viewing Lr as my solution to problem of what happens when / if I stop subscribing to Photoshop CC. Now if I understand what Mike is saying, under the new PS CC + Lr CC plan, both PS and Lr would cease working if / when I stop my subscription. Thus it appears that I will want to continue upgrading my perpetually licensed Lr, so the net benefit to me of the PS CC + Lr CC plan is that the $9.99 price is not just a single year introductory price. Rather it is the standard or base, etc., price (which I assume Adobe will raise over time as the cost of living increases, and I certainly can't complain about that).
My question is, am I properly understanding the implications of the PS CC + Lr CC offering?
So while I sincerely do appreciate this offer by Adobe, it still leaves the problem that is most concerning for me, which is what some people call the 'exit strategy' for photographers. In the end the absence of a 'solution' for loyal customers who for one reason or another -- loss of employment, retirement and consequent reduction in income, etc. -- feel they must drop their subscription but what to continue using the tools they used to process the images in their collection.
Best regards,
David
-
I have subscribed to Photoshop under the $9.99 single application offer, and at the same time upgraded Lightroom to the perpetual license Lightroom 5, with the intention to continue upgrading the perpetually licensed Lightroom. Under this scenario, I was viewing Lr as my solution to problem of what happens when / if I stop subscribing to Photoshop CC. Now if I understand what Mike is saying, under the new PS CC + Lr CC plan, both PS and Lr would cease working if / when I stop my subscription.
I don't think this is correct. If you already have perpetual licences to LR and PS, and then take out a subscription to CC, those perpetual LR and PS licences exist in addition to your subscription licence to LR and PS. If you subsequently stop your CC licence, you still have the perpetual licences, albeit not updated.
I specifically asked Adobe this on a chat session a day or two ago, and they confirmed this.
-
am I properly understanding the implications
Probably. And what that means is that on the day you decide to nuke your subscription you'll need to pop for whatever is the price of Lightroom perpetual at that time - which will probably be in the neighborhood of one year's subscription price. Then in another "X" months, buy the next upgrade, and the next, and the next, and the next... unless you need or want to ossify at some point in the progression of ongoing advances in the technology. And the same will be true with anyone's software products, owned or not. Keep up, or ossify, those are the choices. The method of keeping up is moot. The cost of keeping up varies. If ossification is the choice at some point, the real issue will be to start archiving the finished work in the "most likely to survive over time" format (which will also undoubtedly change over time). ;D
Rand
-
A lot of us baulked at the price of PS within CC and the fact that we could no longer buy PS with a perpetual license.
We were told that this is the way of the modern world and if we did not like it, then Adobe was quite happy to show us the exit, because photographers didn’t add much to Adobe’s revenue stream and PS was never designed for photographers anyway.
Then there was concern that LR would also only become available as part of the CC subscription model, but photographers were assured there were no plans to do this.
Now Adobe decides that photographers do matter after all and to prove this have bundled LR and PS together, into a cheaper subscription licensing package for photographers and told us that this is our reward for being loyal customers, and that LR CC will have many features not available in the perpetual license version, which by definition means the perpetual license version of LR will be hobbled in some way and probably allowed to wither and die on the vine.
Yet lots of people who initially couldn’t accept Adobe’s locked in life time subscription fees, saw the low $9.99 time limited sign up option being dangled in front of their eyes and seemed willing to forget there are no price guarantees going into the future and no exit strategy.
So, even though we didn’t want PS by subscription, Adobe’s answer has been, well lets add LR into the subscription package for a ‘hook them in’ price and the only question you will hear, is where do I sign?
You really have got to hand it to Adobe, or at least the clever so-and-so who hatched up this latest scheme, because it seems that every time Adobe stumbles, they always land on their feet.
Dave
-
... LR CC will have many features not available in the perpetual license version, which by definition means the perpetual license version of LR will be hobbled in some way and probably allowed to wither and die on the vine.
I must have missed that part. My impression is that LR as included in this offer IS the perpetual version, but will disappear if you stop paying for CC. There is only one version of LR, but they're including access to it (not a license for it) when you sign up for this deal.
-
LR CC will have many features not available in the perpetual license version, which by definition means the perpetual license version of LR will be hobbled in some way and probably allowed to wither and die on the vine.
I must have missed that part.
Dave has misinterpreted that aspect. From all I've heard, there will not be two versions but LR may gain Adobe Cloud services which you'd only be able to use with a subscription. See an example in this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=yk5JiVby7eQ#t=1988 - 37 minutes in and you'll see Adobe's Tom Hogarty synchronizing work back and forth between LR on two computers (a laptop and an iPad).
-
I must have missed that part. My impression is that LR as included in this offer IS the perpetual version, but will disappear if you stop paying for CC. There is only one version of LR, but they're including access to it (not a license for it) when you sign up for this deal.
As I understand what Mike Chambers has been saying, there will be two versions of LR: subscription and perpetual-licence, but they will both continue be updated. If you subscribe to the new "Photoshop Photography Program" you get LR updated as part of that, so long as you subscribe. The perpetual-licence version will get updated, but you have to pay for the update.
(This compares to Photoshop, where the perpetual-licence version will no longer be updated.)
If you stop subscribing to CC, you lose CC versions of both PS and LR. You still have any perpetual versions you had before subscribing to CC, but those won't have been updated in the mean time, of course.
-
All I am trying to say, is that if we didn't want PS by subscription, how does offering us a low priced and time limited package that also includes LR by subscription, address that original concern? It doesn't, it is simply a way to sweeten the pot and divert peoples attention away from the fact that subscription is still subscription, with no price guarantees for the future and no exit strategy.
Dave
-
I don't think this is correct. If you already have perpetual licences to LR and PS, and then take out a subscription to CC, those perpetual LR and PS licences exist in addition to your subscription licence to LR and PS. If you subsequently stop your CC licence, you still have the perpetual licences, albeit not updated.
I specifically asked Adobe this on a chat session a day or two ago, and they confirmed this.
I understand that the perpetually licensed version of Lr5 I have already purchased will continue to work if / when I terminate my subscription to the PS CC + Lr CC offer. What I meant to be saying is that I believe I will need to continue upgrading the perpetual licensed Lr, as the Lr that is part of the new PS CC + Lr CC offer will not work if / when I stop subscribing. So for me that addition of Lr to the PS CC subscription does not provide the solution to what happens when PS CC stops working if / when I no longer subscribe.
Best,
David
-
What I meant to be saying is that I believe I will need to continue upgrading the perpetual licensed Lr, as the Lr that is part of the new PS CC + Lr CC offer will not work if / when I stop subscribing.
This is an aspect of this package that shouldn't be taken lightly or over looked.
Whilst most work made in Photoshop can be saved to universal file types like TIFF or JPG that are widely supported, work in Lightroom stays in it's own propriety catalogue format (remember that not all edits are saved into the XMP data, but are only held in the catalogue). Furthermore LR catalogues are NOT backwards compatible, you can't work a version 5 catalogue in version 4.
Then remember that Adobe decided to stop offering upgrades their software for less than the last version, eg you couldn't upgrade PS CS4 to CS6, will they do that with LR ? Will you trust their answer ?
The only safe answer is to stick with buying perpetual licences.
It's all a mess. Different Adobe people are saying different things, outlining different policies, making different promises and their track record on this sort of issue is poor.
-
This is an aspect of this package that shouldn't be taken lightly or over looked.
Whilst most work made in Photoshop can be saved to universal file types like TIFF or JPG that are widely supported, work in Lightroom stays in it's own propriety catalogue format (remember that not all edits are saved into the XMP data, but are only held in the catalogue). Furthermore LR catalogues are NOT backwards compatible, you can't work a version 5 catalogue in version 4.
Then remember that Adobe decided to stop offering upgrades their software for less than the last version, eg you couldn't upgrade PS CS4 to CS6, will they do that with LR ? Will you trust their answer ?
The only safe answer is to stick with buying perpetual licences.
Or you simply factor-in the cost of Lightroom (or an upgrade if you have an existing perpetual-licence version) if/when you leave CC.
I don't know if I'll take this new plan, but if I do and subsequently decide to cancel, I'll go back to my current Photoshop CS5, and if necessary upgrade my current LR5.
It's all a mess.
Yes, it is rather.
-
This is an aspect of this package that shouldn't be taken lightly or over looked.
Whilst most work made in Photoshop can be saved to universal file types like TIFF or JPG that are widely supported, work in Lightroom stays in it's own propriety catalogue format (remember that not all edits are saved into the XMP data, but are only held in the catalogue). Furthermore LR catalogues are NOT backwards compatible, you can't work a version 5 catalogue in version 4.
Then remember that Adobe decided to stop offering upgrades their software for less than the last version, eg you couldn't upgrade PS CS4 to CS6, will they do that with LR ? Will you trust their answer ?
The only safe answer is to stick with buying perpetual licences.
It's all a mess. Different Adobe people are saying different things, outlining different policies, making different promises and their track record on this sort of issue is poor.
Prudence, it would seem, dictates that finished work be archived as tiff, and of course your original RAW files have not been touched. I've been doing that all along w/ LR - long before these recent changes in Adobe's structure appeared. And, Adobe has said that LR will remain a stand alone perpetual product, lowering the risk of unusable catalogs - though one might need to pony-up the cost of a new perpetual license if you nuke your subscription. Frankly, I don't see any of this as something "new." It has been true of any and all software, either rental or "owned" (which is actually a misnomer since the license conditions could be changed at any incremental upgrade). It is mostly just "the same" in different clothing.
And if we're going to go to the "then I'd have to reprocess my RAWs" ... well, didn't many of us do exactly that when the 2012 process appeared? I didn't want to leave any IQ on the table by leaving many of my beloved "keepers" less than they "could be" w/ the advances in processing. So, over time, one by one, I took a look and re-processed to some degree nearly all of my "really proud of" files.
I'm no fanboy of Adobe, I'm not a fanboy of anything. But some products work better than others, and when you have a better mouse-trap to sell you have an advantage in how you choose to price it, package it, and sell it.
I've just learned to call that "reality." If you liken it to natural selection, Adobe just happens to be at the top of the food chain at the moment. It is what it is . . . and for me, "what it is" is pretty darn good - and more so w/ the Photographer's bundle.
Rand
-
There are two ways you can get Lightroom.
1. You can purchase a perpetual license. This does not provide access to future new versions of the software, although you will have any access to updates (i.e. 5.1, 5.2, etc...) of that software.
2. You can get Lightroom as part of a Creative Cloud membership. You have access to Lightroom, including future updates and versions as long as you continue to be a member of Creative Cloud.
This offer is a Creative Cloud offer. It is not a Photoshop CC subscription, with a perpetual license of Lightroom thrown in. It is a Creative Cloud subscription that includes Lightroom and Photoshop.
Hope that helps...
mike chambers
mesh@adobe.com
I signed up for CC the other day (intending on switching to the new plan when it is available) based on what I understood the new subscription offer would include however I mistakenly thought the Lightroom version included was going to be a perpetual license. Now that you've clarified I've cancelled the subscription as I can't risk losing my LR catalog due to future catalog updates not being compatible with my perpetual version's catalog. Thanks for the clarification.
-
Well... In this digital world we are all "chasing the technology." Like it or not it is true. In fact, as a hobbyist that has been part of the fun - seeing ever increasing image quality, flexibility and possibility.
How many of us are using the same cameras we used even three years ago? The same versions of any software from five years ago? Look at the FOR SALE section and add up the first page's asking prices. Deduct that from what we all paid retail and the cost of "owning" your gear will make the cost of "renting" your software look like mana from heaven. It is all semantics, IMO.
For me, the new CC Photographer's package is a bargain, even WHEN the price will rise over time (just like every other freaking thing on the planet). Not having to think about keeping ACR, PS & LR versions in synch is a nice plus for me too.
I had initially the same "I want to own, not rent" reaction. As I looked at my history of upgrades over the last decade, and how many pages of version numbers, product keys, etc. I have in my notes - well, it kinda made the distinction a little moot.
As I chase the technology, get new gear over time, and enjoy even greater image quality, flexibility, and possibility - the software (rental or not) will remain a very key component and still the cheapest part of the equation by a huge margin. So, for me at least, after looking at the "big picture" I came to the conclusion that while I'd rather have Adobe pay me to use their software that probably wasn't going to happen and that the value using their products represents, as a percentage of my total expenditure on "photography," is the most cost effective part of it. One man's opinion.
Oh, and my fingernails don't turn yellow from using Adobe like they did when I used Kodak. ;D
Rand
My thoughts exactly. There is no satisfying some people.
-
Or you simply factor-in the cost of Lightroom (or an upgrade if you have an existing perpetual-licence version) if/when you leave CC.
The important aspect you've seemed to miss here is that you'll need to continually keep up to date with the current perpetual licence to be 'safe'.
Maybe it will be economic to just to just buy a complete new licence if you want out at a later date, but anyone buying into this 'deal' ought to keep across what the perpetual options are, how they change and if you need to buy anything outside of the CC plan to keep your long term options open.
-
The important aspect you've seemed to miss here is that you'll need to continually keep up to date with the current perpetual licence to be 'safe'.
Maybe it will be economic to just to just buy a complete new licence if you want out at a later date, but anyone buying into this 'deal' ought to keep across what the perpetual options are, how they change and if you need to buy anything outside of the CC plan to keep your long term options open.
No, I didn't miss it! I explained that I'll keep my existing Cs5 licence for Photoshop, and upgrade my existing Lr5 licence as necessary. LR upgrades still work from several versions ago, and even if not, I can afford an LR licence. That's what I factor in to the risk of a CC licence which I subsequently abandon, if I go that way. I've not made up my mind, so this is hyperthetical.
-
The important aspect you've seemed to miss here is that you'll need to continually keep up to date with the current perpetual licence to be 'safe'.
Maybe it will be economic to just to just buy a complete new licence if you want out at a later date, but anyone buying into this 'deal' ought to keep across what the perpetual options are, how they change and if you need to buy anything outside of the CC plan to keep your long term options open.
Pretty accurate I think, except why do you need to continually keep up to date with the current perpetual license?
In the larger view, the basic choice seems to be:
A. Stay with Adobe for now
1. Use PS and LR CC as long as it remains the best choice for you and makes economic sense.
2. If/when they announce the coming end of the LR perpetual license, buy the latest perpetual license update immediately
(modest cost). This allows you to continue working with your RAW files and latest LR catalog edits (your exit
strategy).
3. Your PS output was always TIFF, so you can switch to any other similar competing program you desire.
4. Buy competing programs and start the hard work of migrating your LR data to one of them. You'll have some time
to do it, because your up-to-date perpetual LR version won't go obsolete for a while.
B. Abandon Adobe and adopt alternate competing programs now
1. Jump to step 4 above immediately.
In either case you are going to have to go through the hassle of migrating to other software. Do it now, or do it later if you eventually find the situation intolerable. I'm not advocating for either choice, it's an individual decision based on personal circumstances. Or maybe on how pissed off one is.
-
I would be quite happy if things worked like this:
1) I now own Cs6 Ver.13.0.5 and Lightroom 5.0
2) I get on the $9.99 "CC Bus"
3) Say, after two years, after perhaps two inflation-related increases to the subscription we are now at CS Ver 15.0 and Lightroom 7. (on CC).
4) I decide to get off the "CC Bus".
Do I get off the "CC Bus" with CS Ver 15.0 and Lightroom 7, or do I get off with what I originally started with (Cs6 Ver.13.0.5 and Lightroom 5.0)?
If it is the former - I don't see a problem. If it is the latter I can understand the uncertainty and reluctance to get involved.
That is the only information I require to make my decision.
William
-
do I get off with what I originally started with (Cs6 Ver.13.0.5 and Lightroom 5.0)?
Yes, the rental doesn't buy you anything new, it just lets you use what's current. Stop subscribing and you're back to where you started
-
I would be quite happy if things worked like this:
1) I now own Cs6 Ver.13.0.5 and Lightroom 5.0
2) I get on the $9.99 "CC Bus"
3) Say, after two years, after perhaps two inflation-related increases to the subscription we are now at CS Ver 15.0 and Lightroom 7. (on CC).
4) I decide to get off the "CC Bus".
Do I get off the "CC Bus" with CS Ver 15.0 and Lightroom 7, or do I get off with what I originally started with (Cs6 Ver.13.0.5 and Lightroom 5.0)?
If it is the former - I don't see a problem. If it is the latter I can understand the uncertainty and reluctance to get involved.
That is the only information I require to make my decision.
William
it's the latter.. you get off the CC bus with CS6 and Lr5 with no ability to work on the files you've worked on since moving to CC
and before everybody says just save a Tiff file, this is a pretty s%it "hack" that just about gets you around opening a PSD file - it doesn't do anything Illustrator, InDesign, Premier, Dreamweaver, Flash etc etc..
And, some of us use Photoshop for more than adjusting photos, sometimes we create images from scratch, and a tiff file is no substitute for native.
I know, I know, this is a Photography forum, so I haven't harped on about it too much..
-
it's the latter.. you get off the CC bus with CS6 and Lr5 with no ability to work on the files you've worked on since moving to CC
If that is the case - then all one is left with is to trust that Adobe will not make things more difficult down the line by increasing rentals at a ridiculous rate.
It seems to be that, or move to another product.
I think I am going to trust Adobe at this point (...and they can thank Thomas Knoll and Eric Chan for that!). $9.99 per month is a good deal - even for a South African with the exchange rate as it is at the moment!
William
-
it's the latter.. you get off the CC bus with CS6 and Lr5 with no ability to work on the files you've worked on since moving to CC
I don't think that's true. You would be able to open TIFs in LR1-5, and would be able to open them in CS6 but may find there's an error message where you have done something that's CC-specific - for example, used a new layer blending mode.
-
I don't think that's true. You would be able to open TIFs in LR1-5, and would be able to open them in CS6 but may find there's an error message where you have done something that's CC-specific - for example, used a new layer blending mode.
I think the end of your sentence proves my point...
-
No, you'd still be able to work on the files, but imperfectly. Think trying to open in CS5 a file with CS6 features. That's not "no ability".
-
I don't know if the following information will help alleviate any fears regarding layered PSD/TIFF files (e.g., carefully crafted "master files"), but here goes. Thomas has informed me that Adobe has been very careful in adding features to layered PSD/TIFF in ways so they are still readable (and quite editable) in older Photoshop versions. For example, smart layers become normal layers if they require newer features. If you use a new blend mode or layer effect, you have the option of opening the flattened image exactly, or a layered version with possible visible changes.
Thus, folks who choose later to "get off the CC bus" but still wish to open, convert, print (and perhaps even do some edits to) their layered PSD/TIFF images using an older perpetual version of Photoshop (CS6, CS5, etc.) will continue to be able to do so. The same layered PSD/TIFF files will also be readable in Lightroom, which as Adobe has indicated it intends to keep available in a perpetual license form.
-
I don't know if the following information will help alleviate any fears regarding layered PSD/TIFF files (e.g., carefully crafted "master files"), but here goes. Thomas has informed me that Adobe has been very careful in adding features to layered PSD/TIFF in ways so they are still readable (and quite editable) in older Photoshop versions. For example, smart layers become normal layers if they require newer features. If you use a new blend mode or layer effect, you have the option of opening the flattened image exactly, or a layered version with possible visible changes.
Thus, folks who choose later to "get off the CC bus" but still wish to open, convert, print (and perhaps even do some edits to) their layered PSD/TIFF images using an older perpetual version of Photoshop (CS6, CS5, etc.) will continue to be able to do so. The same layered PSD/TIFF files will also be readable in Lightroom, which as Adobe has indicated it intends to keep available in a perpetual license form.
Hi Eric,
Thanks, is does help and I appreciate the effort all at Adobe do.
It does still hurt though, we have 35 very talented people working very hard to build a business - building quality "carefully crafted master files" as you call them, and more so, building files which are modifiable allowing us to react quickly to client requests. Looking at the wonderful advancements in recent releases, in years to come, by your own admission there is a lot on the way, it's hard not to imagine the inflexibility that will eventually filter in. think 5, 10 years down the line.
the thing is, a few years ago, cs3, we standardized on Ilustrator - before that we mostly used Coral Draw (at the time it was Rev4). It took a lot of effort to do it but it was worth it. From our years of using CoralDraw, we have a lot of legacy files, and I mean a lot. Our clients have built a lot of trust in us, they have expectations of us. We still have CoralDraw installed on every machine to allow us to react when a client come calling, or we need to reference a previous design. Sure, you can open some versions of CoralDraw files in some versions of illustrator, but again you lose functionality, lose the ability to react quickly. We could have batch exported literally thousands of files to PDF or EPS and taken our chances on import but at what cost?
if CoralDraw was a subscription service, we would have had to maintain that subscription, paying for an obsolete software package or rolled the dice on every import.
we moved from CoralDraw because Illustrator was a superior package. What if, in years to come, Adobe is no longer on top of the pile? This is just 1 of many scenarios that literally keep me awake at night.
James
-
I don't know if the following information will help alleviate any fears regarding layered PSD/TIFF files (e.g., carefully crafted "master files"), but here goes. Thomas has informed me that Adobe has been very careful in adding features to layered PSD/TIFF in ways so they are still readable (and quite editable) in older Photoshop versions. For example, smart layers become normal layers if they require newer features. If you use a new blend mode or layer effect, you have the option of opening the flattened image exactly, or a layered version with possible visible changes.
Thus, folks who choose later to "get off the CC bus" but still wish to open, convert, print (and perhaps even do some edits to) their layered PSD/TIFF images using an older perpetual version of Photoshop (CS6, CS5, etc.) will continue to be able to do so. The same layered PSD/TIFF files will also be readable in Lightroom, which as Adobe has indicated it intends to keep available in a perpetual license form.
Eric, thank you. That is the first post I have seen, on any forum since this affair hit the fan, that actually addresses my principal concern.
The new deal looks tempting as it is presently being presented and combined with this new information gives me serious pause for thought. My exit strategy up to this point has been looking at the interesting work being done on PhotoLine but this would currently involve similar compromises as outlined in the backward compatibility scenario you have offered.
So, to be clear, is the current intention to commit to such a backward readability path for layered files in the future? Perhaps an option in the save command even if it does mean larger file sizes.
-
Hi James,
I hear you and I understand your position. For you and your business, it is very important to be able to "access" the master files per client requests.
Now, I put "access" in quotes because I think we need to carefully distinguish between two types of file/image access: merely viewing the results (which also means saving to other formats, printing, etc.) and editing. The former is basically equivalent to seeing a "flattened" version of the image. The latter means being able to tweak the layers themselves, masks, smart filters, etc.
Are both types of "access" important to you?
Eric
-
So, to be clear, is the current intention to commit to such a backward readability path for layered files in the future? Perhaps an option in the save command even if it does mean larger file sizes.
Hi Wayland,
Yes, indeed -- Ps has maintained a backward compatibility path for several years and the team intends to continue that. As indicated above, if you choose to use an older version of Ps to read newer files, you should always be able to view (i.e., see, print, save as other formats) the images exactly as you left them. Same with using Lr.
However, whether or not you'll be able to edit the individual components (e.g., smart filters, smart objects, etc.) will depend on the specific features you used in the document. For example, if you're just using Ps for curves + adjustment layers + masks, then you'll have no problem editing those files in older Ps versions like CS6, since those older versions also support those features. On the other hand, if your document uses a smart filter layer for a feature introduced sometime during Photoshop CC, then no, you won't be able to edit that layer in older Ps versions (since those versions came out before the feature, right?).
So, there is an important distinction between viewing and editing in terms of image access (I also wrote this in the note to James above) in terms of an "exit strategy" for subscription going forward.
Please let me know if I can clarify anything ...
-
Hi James,
I hear you and I understand your position. For you and your business, it is very important to be able to "access" the master files per client requests.
Now, I put "access" in quotes because I think we need to carefully distinguish between two types of file/image access: merely viewing the results (which also means saving to other formats, printing, etc.) and editing. The former is basically equivalent to seeing a "flattened" version of the image. The latter means being able to tweak the layers themselves, masks, smart filters, etc.
Are both types of "access" important to you?
Eric
Hi Eric,
yes, unfortunately both types of access are important to us. We often iterate designs - think of a product refresh, apple is coming out with it's iPhone 5s today for example - physically the same but with upgraded internals and perhaps an updated CMF (colour, finish & Materials). I hear they are launching a gold version for the Chinese markets.. This is very common place in industry.
now if you look at lead times for product to be designed - from initial brief to concept through to production, it's probably 18-24 months (depending on product complexity), then looking at the products lifecycle once launched, if aimed at trend seekers, it could go through an CMF refresh after 6 months (look at updating colours, applying pattern, use of graphics etc) or if it's a more main stream product, that time scale could be 18 months. Now if you look at Medical - that could be many years. (say a company wants to license it product to another company and that company wants their corporate brand integrated into it)
Step 1 in all of this (after you have understood the new brief and performed any research necessary), is to go back to the original files, (which from the above time line could be anything from 2 years to, well anything, 5, 10 years old whatever) and quickly modify them to put together a set of proposals to generate conversations within the design team, the client team and potentially elicit user feedback. Sure for final packaging rendering or final output, having to go back and recreate is OK, because the time is usually there, but as I said in my previous posts, our clients have expectations of us - they want us to react an react fast.
Thanks for the reply.
James
-
Hi Eric,
To give you a simple example, we build a lot of GUIs (graphic user interfaces) for various things, could be apps, could be bespoke interfaces for large industrial machines, could be software, whatever.
so imagine this this lovely Red and Blue square below is a beautifully crafted GUI for an iPhone App (I know, you'd need a lot of imagination for that! :) )
(http://i43.tinypic.com/2l9k5uc.png)
this is created in CS6, using shape vectors and a stroke.
now our client comes along and says we need an iPad version - well, it vector so a resize is no problem. (or a new form factor yet to be released)
(http://i41.tinypic.com/wqssif.png)
now if I were to open that file in CS5, as a PSD or a TIFF - it becomes rastersized. good luck resizing that..
(http://i44.tinypic.com/16htdi1.png)
now for a box with a simple stroke - no big deal right?
but this is what our layer tree normally looks like..
(http://i44.tinypic.com/10okvw0.png)
and that's not even that complex.. but there is probably 40 - 50 hours work in that file. And we have a LOT of them.
I hope this puts what we are going through in context.
James
-
Hi James,
This is a good illustration of your workflow and concerns. I appreciate your taking the time to describe it and provide the example.
To be honest: my take is that by preserving this workflow, you are still actually using Ps in a fairly sophisticated way. You have not really "exited" the Ps subscription program, but instead are continuing to receive significant value from being able to edit such documents. More specifically, you are retaining the ability to go into a (potentially very complex, multi-layered) document, edit individual components, and render out / export a new version for a client. That's what Adobe is saying they're going to charge you $10 a month to be able to perform ...
-
Hi James,
This is a good illustration of your workflow and concerns. I appreciate your taking the time to describe it and provide the example.
To be honest: my take is that by preserving this workflow, you are still actually using Ps in a fairly sophisticated way. You have not really "exited" the Ps subscription program, but instead are continuing to receive significant value from being able to edit such documents. More specifically, you are retaining the ability to go into a (potentially very complex, multi-layered) document, edit individual components, and render out / export a new version for a client. That's what Adobe is saying they're going to charge you $10 a month to be able to perform ...
Hi Eric,
unfortunately, we don't qualify... and for what we need - take a look at the costs below.
this is an extract from a post on another topic. - http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=78151.msg627986#msg627986
We have about 20 design standard licenses, 3 production premium licences, maybe 15 acrobat pro and a few individual PS, and AI and maybe 10 or 15 PSe licences. (we have no master suite) – small customers to be sure in Adobe grand scheme of things.
we're currently using CS5. we wanted to move to 6 when it was released, but 5.5 being treated as a full release put us 2 releases behind which we certainly weren’t pleased about.. but we can get over that..
in general, we've upgraded every 2 releases. we certainly see the advantage of upgrades, but we have to balance costs.
so.. the last time we upgraded from CS 3 to CS5, I think it cost us about €18k - so annualized, €6k.. a very manageable amount of money.
the thing is, almost none of us use just 1 program, a lot of us use PS, AI and ID on a daily basis. design standard was the ideal package for the majority of us, and we expanded where needed.
I certainly understand the benefit of the full master suite - I'd love to have it.. but.. not everyone in our team need it.. you can buy the individual licences but, it's not really viable to do it for 3 individual licenses per user.
quickly doing the math - even just for 25 CC licences (which isn't enough for us but probably representative of what we currently use) - €61 per user per month, that's 61*12*25 - that comes to €18k per year!
now to make things worse, instead of getting a discount for buying 25 licenses, they introduce "teams"... so instead of paying €61 per month, it's €86!!! so that's 86*12*25 - that's almost €26,000 per year!!!
I like centrally managed licenses, I don't need 100gb of online storage.
so that goes from an annualized cost of €6k per year to €26k per year..
__________________________
so that's a pretty big jump - we're growing, getting more users, our bill may be €50k per year in the not too distant future through expansion and increases. having just gone through a recession, where we had to make the choice between layoffs and software maintenance, we chose to invest in our staff, if we didn't we wouldn't be as strong as we are today. we were able to hold off our maintenance to our PTC, Autodesk, Keyshot and Dassault systems software companies for a year or 2 and keep our staff and maintain the ability to work. we are now back on maintenance for most software, having paid a penalty for our hiatus, but that allowed us to survive..
my point is who knows what the future holds, but I know Adobes' success depends on it's clients success, and I know Adobe employees want us to succeed, but... some of the decision makers are not making it easy.
if it was $10 a month, I wouldn't even be talking about it.. but it's actually more like buying 25 Design Standard licenses every year..
James
-
I predict in ten years most photographers will not use Photoshop. They will use third-party full-featured programs instead. Has anyone noticed that Topaz Labs is slowly morphing into Photoshop?
Never heard of this before. Thanks for link. Have you used this yourself? Any good?
Thanks
John