Adobe diverging Creative Cloud and Standard versions

[Janne Aavasalo]

Actually imaging software from other companies seems to be going down in price through the years so my questions are pretty much targeted towards Adobe.

Even if your question was targeted towards Adobe, the gist of my reply still remains. More money and greed that is.

Adobe will put the price point of their products at a level the market can bare (or better yet, at the level they think the market can bare). And it's quite easy for them to do so since they are in fact the "industry standard". So when they are the "go-to" company, others must lower their price point to even try to compete with them. And yes, it does sound like a monopoly on Adobes part.

[jrsforums]

I've been impressed by the excellence of your previous comments on LuLa, so please help me understand:

-- How exactly will stopping paying for PS CC prevent anyone from showing JPG and TIFF images wherever and whenever they like?

Bart can answer for himself....but my view...

You are correct....end products...i.e. jpegs and tiffs are not the problem.

After finishing work in PS, do you only store a jpeg or flattened tiff.  Do you ever store the layered PSD or TIFF?  Do you ever want to go back and and slightly adjust the image and create a new version....without having to start all over from the original RAW?

Not being able to get to the work-in-progress is the problem I see.

As I said in an earlier post....Lightroom would create an even greater problem if it were CC only, as often, finished output (jpegs, tiffs) are not saved as they can so easily be recreated for printing, email, etc.  Virtual copies will be lost.  Collections no longer exist.  Etc.

[Stephen Girimont]

I was told by Jeffrey Tranberry at Adobe that's an old URL and incorrect and hopefully it will be removed. There is no such restriction on updating a CC build. Download and install the first release, run it as long as you pay the subscription.

Thanks. That's what I was hoping. I also found references to the plan to "archive" earlier versions of the applications so they are available for those who can't use the latest and greatest. They are naturally vague as to how many versions back they plan to archive, but it sounds like there is hope for those who can't stay current with regards to OS and hardware (who can?)

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

I've been impressed by the excellence of your previous comments on LuLa, so please help me understand:

-- How exactly will stopping paying for PS CC prevent anyone from showing JPG and TIFF images wherever and whenever they like?

Hi Isaac,

JPEGs and TIFFs are to be considered virtual end products. They can be viewed and edited by many applications, they are not in jeopardy. However, when a photographer creates a file, it may consist of many (either adjustment or composting) layers some of which have not exactly (mathematically) documented behavior on the final Flattened look, and require the application proper to work for the final Flattening. And then there are "Smart layers" which allow to readjust the source image (e.g. a Raw files) or layers before finalizing the output with other layers still in place.

There may be several of such layers which allow for repurposed use of the composite file, e.g. a blurred layer that allows to down-sample for webpublishing, a pristine only Capture sharpened layer used as a basis for huge halo free enlargements, and a layer that's prepared for a specific print output. There may be masks to remove the background at will, but not permanently.

When a newer version  of Photoshop is used to create such layers, then some of these newer layers may be unrecognized by older versions (i.e. a perpetual licensed CS6). When the behavior of a newer version changes how the older version's adjustments were intended to be interpreted, things can also be broken.

While some may classify that as FUD, it is a real concern for some uses. Also, the 'forcing' of users of CS5 and earlier to go to upgrading from one previous version only, and now abandoning new CS7+ perpetual licence versions because the upgrade money is in, and now the ransom techniques used to permanently tap into the bank accounts of users does not inspire much faith in unchanged monthly fees towards the future, and even backwards compatibility in reading files unless permanently subscribed as we go forward. It could become another tool to force users to subscribe.

As the saying goes, faith comes on foot but leaves on horseback. Adobe has violated the faith that many (mostly photographers, even some professionals) had in them as a partner.

Cheers,
Bart

P.S. Do not save your files as PSDs but as TIFFs instead. Same functionality, minus the proprietary PSD bits. It may also be safer in the long run to use sidecar files instead of embedding the Raw conversion parameters in a DNG.

[Rhossydd]

As I said in an earlier post....Lightroom would create an even greater problem if it were CC only, as often, finished output (jpegs, tiffs) are not saved as they can so easily be recreated for printing, email, etc.  Virtual copies will be lost.  Collections no longer exist.  Etc.

It's not impossible that at least part of the catalogue could be migrated to another product.
Keywording, collections, rating etc should be easy enough to cope with. It might even be possible for at least some basic adjustments to get migrated like crops, colour temperature and some other treatments. But there will still be a lot propriety settings that won't be easily transferable, but then LR has been through three different process versions so far anyway. It will make things awkward for people wishing to bail out from Adobe entirely, but it may prove an escape route for some.
Hopefully Phase One will see the what's being written everywhere at the moment and grasp the opportunity to build a migration assistant.

[gjanee]

I'm just an eager hobbyist; I don't do photography all the time.  And I don't care about or need the latest/greatest features.  I bought Photoshop CS5 and it's been just fine for my level of skill and needs.  I didn't upgrade to CS6, and probably wouldn't even upgrade to CS7.

However, even if I don't want or need to upgrade, upgrades are inevitable, whether it's because of support for new RAW formats, operating system upgrades, dependencies between applications, etc.

Which is to say, Adobe's move is going to really hurt me.  Their calculus by which subscription pricing turns out to be cheaper doesn't work at all in my case, for I am an infrequent upgrader, more on the order of 4 years than 18 months.  Adobe's move is deeply disappointing to me.

I must say I don't understand Schewe's insensitivity to the situation, as exemplified by his response to somebody else, "you haven't been a Photoshop customer since CS4, so it's not like Adobe is loosing you. You're already gone."  Hey, I am an Adobe customer!  I bought CS5, didn't I?  And I bought Lightroom!  I like these tools and would like to (infrequently) upgrade them.  But there's no way I want to or can afford to fork over much more money to Adobe, every month, forever.

[Alan Smallbone]

The cartoon you posted shows the "end product" framed on a wall, as a broken image, and a direct consequence of "What happens if I stop paying?"

As you have confirmed -- that is not true.

Isn't that being a little too nit picky Isaac, maybe the image is on a screen or a raw file, or maybe it is just a metaphor....

Alan

[Janne Aavasalo]

The cartoon you posted shows the "end product" framed on a wall, as a broken image, and a direct consequence of "What happens if I stop paying?"

As you have confirmed -- that is not true.

My word, I was about to answer you on this since I thought you meant the cartoon. I didn't do it because I didn't think anyone would mean and take it that literally.

Well, a new word for your English vocabulary from a Finnish person -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analogy

[jrsforums]

The cartoon you posted shows the "end product" framed on a wall, as a broken image, and broken as a direct consequence of "What happens if I stop paying?"

As you have confirmed -- that is not true.

The image was that of a photographer who was Renting" his images "subscribe to my photography".  The rental was for access to viewing the jpeg.  Rental stops...access stops.

It's called an analog   

[Michael Schoenfeld]

I don't even dare post here for fear I might get beat up by the "mobs with pitchforks" - oh well, here goes......

I have (3) perpetual (old, normal) licenses for PSCS6; (1) perpetual license for Premiere Pro CS6; (2) Lightroom perpetuals.....
(So far so good - nobody can hate me for that)
I just purchased a Creative Cloud US$49.00 a month, "Individual" cloud seat. I am the only person in my office, besides a free lance assistant hired per job, free lance stylists, talent, and my bookkeeper. Oh yeah, someone cleans once a week. And I have an accountant and a lawyer.
I do ALL of my photo retouching, photo management - my assistant doesn't touch the data - call me crazy. Just the way it is.

I own/use (5) Mac computers; MBPro 17 MAIN laptop; MB Air emergency Laptop; iMac 27 (Studio); one "old" MacPro; one "newer" MacPro (for video editing) SSD in this one.  Five machines - one person only, no assistant. ONE USER.

So here's my question:
I am allowed (2) activations at a time as I understand it, for my individual Cloud subscription. I assume I can install the software on ALL machines, leave it activated it on my main machine (Laptop 17"), and activate/deactivate the software as needed on the other machines, correct? (2) activations at a time, as explained for an individual cloud seat.
I actually tried to purchase an additional "individual" cloud seat, but Adobe wanted a different email address/ user ID.
I use only ONE email address - life is too short.
Hence the question.
Bonus question - I assume that since PSCS6 remains a perpetual license, I can still run it on more than (2) machines at a time - remember I have (3) seats of PSCS6 - perpetual.
Warning to those who simply want to throw poo today. I am NOT interested in a hostile rant, speculation, tin hats, or assumptions; If you don't really KNOW, please refrain from pontificating/speculating - this is an HONEST question (maybe too early in the anger cycle for a real question/answer thing..), from a working pro, who is interested in a REAL answer. I don't "hate" a software company, nor am I angry. I just want a strategy to work going forward. $50 bucks a month is a bargain if you are a working pro - sorry - hate me if you must, but I spend more each year on ftp services, stamps, inkjet ink, inkjet paper, book-keeping, CPS membership, equipment repairs, Internet services, etc. Not meaning this to sound like bragging; it's just what I do for a living. $50 bucks a month - if you're a pro, please keep this in perspective
Anybody remember Live Picture? Xres? I can still access ALL of my digital images from 1993 forward - figure it out folks, it's not rocket science. If you don't want to use Adobe's products, don't; I do, and am not upset - life goes on.
And, as one might suspect, I own three licenses for PhotoKitSharpener - love it - so Jeff, If you have any ideas how my situation might work, I am all ears, and, I do respect all that you do here - met you at Photo plus; own most of your books - thanks for all you do. Let the hater's ear's burn.
Sorry folks; Jeff is "copy" right, in the USofA at least - read the EULA. I always own ALL of my images, even if someone is licensing them for "temporary" or "perpetual" use.
(Couldn't help drop that in)

Anyone want to genuinely help, I'd appreciate that.

Michael Schoenfeld

[jrsforums]

Stopping paying for PS CC won't prevent anyone from showing JPG and TIFF and RAW on a screen.

As Bartvander Wolf also said -- " Do not save your files as PSDs but as TIFFs instead."

Maybe the cartoon is just scare mongering.

Let's try this a different way.

If I take your photos.  I put them on my website.  I charge you $5/month to view them whenever you want.  You stop paying the monthly fee.  I end your access to my website.  You can no longer see them.  

[john beardsworth]

The cartoon you posted shows the "end product" framed on a wall, as a broken image, and broken as a direct consequence of "What happens if I stop paying?"
As you have confirmed -- that is not true.

Are you aware it was a joke?

[nemo295]

I must say I don't understand Schewe's insensitivity to the situation, as exemplified by his response to somebody else, "you haven't been a Photoshop customer since CS4, so it's not like Adobe is loosing you. You're already gone."  Hey, I am an Adobe customer! I bought CS5, didn't I?  And I bought Lightroom!  I like these tools and would like to (infrequently) upgrade them.  But there's no way I want to or can afford to fork over much more money to Adobe, every month, forever.

Exactly right. You are an Adobe customer. In fact, you're the kind of loyal customer that most companies would love to have. Problem is, you're not the kind of customer that Adobe wants or respects. They don't want a customer who only upgrades when it makes sense for them. They want a perpetual and automatic revenue stream. So to hell with you, Mister I'll-Only-Buy-Upgrades-When-It's-Something-I-Can Use. Just who do you think you are? We want customers who will pay and pay and pay!

As far as Jeff Schewe is concerned, I understand where he's coming from just fine. He's an Adobe apologist. All he's doing is parroting the company's marketing propaganda regarding the Creative Cloud, so I think anything he has to say in defense of it can be easily dismissed. Remember: Adobe is not our friend. Adobe is here to squeeze you for every last penny they can and they'll do everything in their power to leverage their virtual monopoly to that end. This is a textbook example of why monopolies suck.

[Janne Aavasalo]

I don't even dare post here for fear I might get beat up by the "mobs with pitchforks" - oh well, here goes......

I have (3) perpetual (old, normal) licenses for PSCS6; (1) perpetual license for Premiere Pro CS6; (2) Lightroom perpetuals.....
(So far so good - nobody can hate me for that)
I just purchased a Creative Cloud US$49.00 a month, "Individual" cloud seat. I am the only person in my office, besides a free lance assistant hired per job, free lance stylists, talent, and my bookkeeper. Oh yeah, someone cleans once a week. And I have an accountant and a lawyer.
I do ALL of my photo retouching, photo management - my assistant doesn't touch the data - call me crazy. Just the way it is.

I own/use (5) Mac computers; MBPro 17 MAIN laptop; MB Air emergency Laptop; iMac 27 (Studio); one "old" MacPro; one "newer" MacPro (for video editing) SSD in this one.  Five machines - one person only, no assistant. ONE USER.

So here's my question:
I am allowed (2) activations at a time as I understand it, for my individual Cloud subscription. I assume I can install the software on ALL machines, leave it activated it on my main machine (Laptop 17"), and activate/deactivate the software as needed on the other machines, correct? (2) activations at a time, as explained for an individual cloud seat.
I actually tried to purchase an additional "individual" cloud seat, but Adobe wanted a different email address/ user ID.
I use only ONE email address - life is too short.
Hence the question.
Bonus question - I assume that since PSCS6 remains a perpetual license, I can still run it on more than (2) machines at a time - remember I have (3) seats of PSCS6 - perpetual.
Warning to those who simply want to throw poo today. I am NOT interested in a hostile rant, speculation, tin hats, or assumptions; If you don't really KNOW, please refrain from pontificating/speculating - this is an HONEST question (maybe too early in the anger cycle for a real question/answer thing..), from a working pro, who is interested in a REAL answer. I don't "hate" a software company, nor am I angry. I just want a strategy to work going forward. $50 bucks a month is a bargain if you are a working pro - sorry - hate me if you must, but I spend more each year on ftp services, stamps, inkjet ink, inkjet paper, book-keeping, CPS membership, equipment repairs, Internet services, etc. Not meaning this to sound like bragging; it's just what I do for a living. $50 bucks a month - if you're a pro, please keep this in perspective
Anybody remember Live Picture? Xres? I can still access ALL of my digital images from 1993 forward - figure it out folks, it's not rocket science. If you don't want to use Adobe's products, don't; I do, and am not upset - life goes on.
And, as one might suspect, I own three licenses for PhotoKitSharpener - love it - so Jeff, If you have any ideas how my situation might work, I am all ears, and, I do respect all that you do here - met you at Photo plus; own most of your books - thanks for all you do. Let the hater's ear's burn.
Sorry folks; Jeff is "copy" right, in the USofA at least - read the EULA. I always own ALL of my images, even if someone is licensing them for "temporary" or "perpetual" use.
(Couldn't help drop that in)

Anyone want to genuinely help, I'd appreciate that.

Michael Schoenfeld

I can't see no reason for not being able to use all your PS CS6 licenses like before and now on top of that your two new CC subscriptions on two machines.

Going back and forth subscription activations between all computers might not work, in theory yes, you take from one machine and insert to another, but usually there's some kind of limit to activations/software (or subscription). And again, usually you'll have to contact customer service after that limit has been reached.

Hopefully someone can clarify this with CC related information and not just "how it usually works" - information.

[Jack Hogan]

I don't even dare post here for fear I might get beat up by the "mobs with pitchforks" - oh well, here goes......

(So far so good - nobody can hate me for that)

... call me crazy. Just the way it is.

...Warning to those who simply want to throw poo today. I am NOT interested in a hostile rant, speculation, tin hats, or assumptions; If you don't really KNOW, please refrain from pontificating/speculating - this is an HONEST question (maybe too early in the anger cycle for a real question/answer thing..), from a working pro, who is interested in a REAL answer.

... Not meaning this to sound like bragging; it's just what I do for a living.

... Let the hater's ear's burn.

...Anyone want to genuinely help, I'd appreciate that.

Michael Schoenfeld

Troll.

[Michael Schoenfeld]

Thanks Janne,
As I said, I only bought ONE CC seat - a second seat requires a second Adobe ID - I only want to manage ONE Adobe ID.

From what I've read you can activate/deactivate the software on machines without limitations - I've tried it, and so far it works fine.

Michael Schoenfeld

[Michael Schoenfeld]

Yeah, I'm a "troll"
Hope that was a joke...
;-)

Michael Schoenfeld
www.michaelschoenfeld.com

[john beardsworth]

Are you aware of how confused people are about PS CC ?

Er, yes. Now tell me if you recognized it was a joke which made a point pretty well.

[jrsforums]

Sorry folks; Jeff is "copy" right, in the USofA at least - read the EULA. I always own ALL of my images, even if someone is licensing them for "temporary" or "perpetual" use.

If you sell me a print, I own the print.  I can view it whenever I want, forever.  I can sell it or pass it down in my will.  I have perpetual rights to that print.

I do not have any copyrights to the image on the print.  I cannot reproduce it or create additional copies.

In my view, the print is similar to a perpetual license of software.  I can use it whenever I want, forever.  I do not own any copyrights.  Using the copyright verbage...and continuing on ad nauseum...was just a "fox" to muddy the argument in Adobe's favor.

[Janne Aavasalo]

Analogy does not always show what is true.

Maybe the cartoon is just scare mongering.


Bad analogy -- that's not true of PS CC.


Are you aware of how confused people are about PS CC ?

How is that analogy not true? If you cancel your subscription, you'll have to fall back to CS6 or what you happen to own before going with CC.

Like I've mentioned before, maybe not such an issue now, but how about in say 4 years time? How well does CS6 play with the 2017 version of CC?

Don't know about scare mongering, but yes, it is true that people are scared (and they should be). And being scared is not good, being prepared is better.