The Adobe Creative Cloud Storm

[stevesanacore]

At this point I am a subscriber. To me it seem the cheaper way to go compared with purchasing the complete suite and upgrading every 18 months like we used to do. Upgrades are critical to keep up with the latest cameras, both still and video for raw processing. I would think this will open the door for other companies to produce apps to finally compete with Photoshop. I think there is a huge market of amateurs or semi-pros that can't afford to or just refuse to purchase a subscription for software. Maybe the sales of Capture One will boom or maybe Aperture will have a revival? But for now, Adobe's subscription plan meets my needs just fine.

[David S]

It seems to me that the Cloud choice works well for large 'shops' and for heavy creative suite users.

It seems to me that it does not work at all for the hobbyist and infrequent user of Photoshop.

Also several have mentioned that upgrades are 'necessary' for new cameras. Actually new program features are not needed for new cameras just the formula/process to decode the new camera's data which would work on older program versions if, and only if, the provider chose to provide that service. SO I "have" to upgrade to get access to a new camera. This has nothing to do with new features I may want or may not want.

So it boils down, for me, to loss of choice and loss of use of data if I later change my mind.

Very frightening.

Dave S

[Gothmoth]

what do you guys think about this:

http://petapixel.com/2013/05/10/adobes-date-of-birth-requirement-and-identity-theft/#disqus_thread

here is the link to the original article:

http://macperformanceguide.com/blog/2013/20130508_1a-Adobe-legal-agreement.html

[John Camp]

I'm really unhappy with Adobe. If Apple added a compositing function to Aperture, I'd change over and never buy another Adobe product. I've only glanced at GIMP, and that in the last two days, and I'm traveling so I haven't really had a chance to dig into it. But I'm not a computer guy, and it looks a little techie to me, like you'll have to learn to speak computer to really use it.

Here's a question -- is there a decent compositing program out there, other than Photoshop? Will GIMP do that? That's the only function I need, and it seems absurd to pay a monthly subscription price for something I use six days a year. In fact, I refuse to do it, and since I'm being forced to change, I'm not even going to upgrade my CS5 to CS6; that would just delay things for a year or so. I've just got to find another compositing program. What about Corel? Will that do it?

By the way, I have no faith at all that Apple would ever add much of anything to Aperture -- I think the company has about zero interest in that product.

About Schewe -- I understand why he's been defensive about Adobe, and I've got no problem with it. If Adobe issues what sounds like a semi-ironclad assurance that they'll continue to update stand-alone versions of Lightroom, I'll continue to buy Jeff's books, which I have found to be well-written and quite useful. But I suspect that Adobe won't do that -- I suspect that as soon as the dust settles from this Photoshop move, they'll move Lightroom, as well.

I also suspect that Adobe has made a serious strategic mistake. I think it will pay off for a few quarters, or even a few years, but then they'll start getting in trouble. Adobe now owns the Creative Suite space, but this move creates a real opening for competitors, and at the same time, creates a lot of distrust in Adobe. And the competition won't have Adobe's overhead -- they'll be able to attack in a piecemeal way, with much smaller programs. Adobe now forces you to pay a high price even though you may only use one or two functions in a given Creative Suite program. That's why a lot of people only upgrade their CS every few years -- they don't really need all those new features. As long as you only had to pay a couple hundred bucks to upgrade every three years or so, that's fine, they'd do it. But if somebody comes up with a decent program that performs that needed function, and it's stand-alone and may be good for years...why would you put up with this subscription bs?

[Gothmoth]

About Schewe -- I understand why he's been defensive about Adobe, and I've got no problem with it. If Adobe issues what sounds like a semi-ironclad assurance that they'll continue to update stand-alone versions of Lightroom, I'll continue to buy Jeff's books, which I have found to be well-written and quite useful. But I suspect that Adobe won't do that -- I suspect that as soon as the dust settles from this Photoshop move, they'll move Lightroom, as well.

well yes.. that´s pretty obvious isn´t it.

and i would never trust someone so tied to adobe having a objective opinion.

[TMARK]

I don't shoot much professionally any more, but when I do, I rarely need anything more than CS5.  On one machine I have Cs3, and in fact don't really need anything else.

Raw Processing:  LR, C1, NX, DPP, Bible.  Make basic adjustments, export to Tiff.  Open in Cs3 or 5, adjust, resize, layers, retouch, output sharpening, proof print.  BAM!  No need for any subscription software.

What features do people need that not having access to future versions of PS becomes a crippling problem?

[Steve Weldon]

Piracy in itself is not an issue, the issue is the loss of revenue resulting from piracy.

This means that the millions of pirated private copies of PS will not generate much money for Adobe even if CC were uncrackable because the owners of most of these pirated copies would not purchase CC or the perpetual version anyway.

It may be different for companies using pirated copies if their business relies on Adobe products.

Cheers,
Bernard

I don't agree in whole.  They allow piracy and even make it easy.. because they benefit from piracy just like they benefit from selling the software.  The trick is to sell software in the desired region with as little piracy as possible while allowing and even encouraging piracy in other areas they don't expect to sell.

[fredjeang2]

I don't shoot much professionally any more, but when I do, I rarely need anything more than CS5.  On one machine I have Cs3, and in fact don't really need anything else.

Raw Processing:  LR, C1, NX, DPP, Bible.  Make basic adjustments, export to Tiff.  Open in Cs3 or 5, adjust, resize, layers, retouch, output sharpening, proof print.  BAM!  No need for any subscription software.

What features do people need that not having access to future versions of PS becomes a crippling problem?

Same here. Got 1 Ps3 on one unit and one
PS5 on another one.

I actually use only PS5 when I need 64 bits.
Big sizes, heavy files.

Remember this advert: whiter than white?
Clever.

And the day redcineX will support still raw, the days
Of adobe will be over for me.

But we're not there yet.

Ps: about piracy, in my AD short time, I haven't seen
A single agency, included very reputated ones, that
Didn't have some pirated softwares, many time as their
Apps 1.
You just had to ask: Who's got the latest Ps, or ilustrator?
And you had 10 hands giving you the DVDs in a second.

[DaveCurtis]

Now with Lightroonm 5 if they could just add  Pano stitching and HDR I could kick Photoshop into touch!

[Wayland]

I've been playing with alternatives all day.

Gimp is still limited by the 8 bit thing but that may well change soon.

Paint Shop Pro is a little buggy, clumsy in places but very good in others. Biggest downfall cannot save layered Tiffs.

Photoline was a revelation though. It had every thing on my list that I use in PS, many of the features worked better and with more options. The more I looked the more I found interesting new features that I can really make use of.

It's like getting an upgrade from CS6 for a little less than £50 for a full licence.

I know what I'm going to do...

[cybis]

CC: I like the idea but hate the price.

The model works great for music and movies; and I wish it existed for e-books.

For instance, I subscribe to Netflix and Spotify because a little more money gets me a whole lot more intellectual property. It’s a win-win.

One of the problems with Adobe’s scheme however is that, at best, assuming you used to buy every new release, more money now gets you just a bit more IP. But if you used to skip a release or two, the new deal is horrible.

Adobe got greedy.

[NancyP]

I think that Adobe could well take Lightroom into the cloud, and if so, users will be over a barrel because of the significant amount of user work put into the catalogs and the centrality of the catalog function to the workflow. For amateur users, this simply Will Not Fly. What, I have to pay a monthly fee to find stuff on my own hard drive? The DAM function is too much of a "utility", and people don't rent utilities, they buy them, often with great enthusiasm. I might say that the specter of having Adobe in effect repossess the user's added value labor (the customized, keyworded, copyrighted, etc catalog) is enough to make current users think about separate DAM programs and to advise newer hobbyist photographers to stay clear of LR.

I will say that I don't particularly need to go beyond Ps CS6, and wouldn't be interested in the CC unless I wanted to try out other Adobe applications.

The photographers' market segment is a small portion of Adobe's income. I would bet that the bulk of the income and of the piracy involves Acrobat. Acrobat is used by so many businesses, it is almost as ubiquitous as MS Office. Everyone on the planet has the free reader. A decent number of individuals in a business will have the Acrobat document creator software.

[Ray]

Wait a minute! Have I got this right? The full cost of ownership of Photoshop CS6 for someone who is new to the software and not upgrading, is around $1,000, at least in Australia. CS6E is well over $1,000. In a year or two's time, there would be a further $500 (or more) required for an upgrade to CS7, if one wanted the new features which might include the RAW converter for the new camera one has just bought.

However, a subscription to CC for the single application of CS6 is only $20 a month or $240 a year. At that rate, one can subscribe to the single application under the CC system for 6 continuous years for the cost of buying outright, CS6E plus just one upgrade during that 6 year period.

The main issue here, as I see it, are the consequences of storing processed files in the PSD format with lots of layers, should one later decide to cease subscription to Adobe CC. If one is worried about this, then one should always save a flattened tiff version of one's work so it can be opened in other programs.

[kencameron]

Wait a minute! Have I got this right? ...

For someone approaching Photoshop for the first time, your line of analysis seems fair enough. The new arrangements also have the advantage, for new entrants, that they provide access to the software for a (relatively) small initial outlay, and the capacity to drop it if it turns out not to meet their needs. Those complaining are mostly people who have been using it for a while and feel that the changes reduce the value of their investment and increase the cost to them of maintaining access to the current version.

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

For someone approaching Photoshop for the first time, your line of analysis seems fair enough. The new arrangements also have the advantage, for new entrants, that they provide access to the software for a (relatively) small initial outlay, and the capacity to drop it if it turns out not to meet their needs. Those complaining are mostly people who have been using it for a while and feel that the changes reduce the value of their investment and increase the cost to them of maintaining access to the current version.

Hi Ken,

Bingo! And in addition, the unforeseen move to ransom-ware can only explain the Stockholm syndrome, not justify the actions by those who caused it.

Cheers,
Bart

[Nick Rains]

CC is a hell of a good deal for new users, no question about it. It will hook in a load of people who currently cannot afford the CS path. $50 per month for $4000 worth of software - where do I sign?

For those of us who have been forking out for upgrades since 1995 (in my case) it's not a particularly good deal, especially after reading Lloyd Chambers's take.

I only NEED Lightroom for my day to day business plus some Photoshop CHOPs (for special images) that date back to PS4 or 5 (such as layer masks, blend modes, calculations etc). My best way forward from a money POV is to keep my two licences for CS5 and CS6 as they are and stay on the Lightroom upgrade path whether it's Cloud or not. I don't NEED Muse, Cloud space, webhosting etc, or even the new gizmos in Photoshop CC. I don't use PSD file anyway so that's not a bother either.

Lightroom has colour management, 16-bit, a good printer module, good export options - it's a great tool. It's only really the layers stuff that I turn to PS for.

[Ray]

For those of us who have been forking out for upgrades since 1995 (in my case) it's not a particularly good deal, especially after reading Lloyd Chambers's take.

Isn't there a discount for those who've already bought a previous version of Photoshop as far back as CS3?

Those who have been using Photoshop for years should not have to worry about their subscription to CC becoming too expensive and the consequences of ceasing the subscription. They'll always have an older version to fall back on. If the older version doesn't support the RAW format of one's latest camera, no problem. Use the free DNG Converter.

I get a sense this is a storm in a teacup.

[Isaac]

I get a sense this is a storm in a teacup.

I never imagined I would have to publicly congratulate you for being the voice of reason :-)

[Rick Popham]

Isn't there a discount for those who've already bought a previous version of Photoshop as far back as CS3?

Yes, sort of.  There is a discount for the first 12 months.  If you want to subscribe from Photoshop CS3 - CS6 to Photoshop CC, the price is $10/month for the first 12 months.  Since this is about what I've already been paying for my Photoshop Standard perpetual license upgrades, it's not really a discount.  After the 12 months is up, the price doubles. 

Users of the CS bundles or collections are probably getting a better deal, but I don't need that stuff so I haven't really paid attention.

[kaelaria]

That discount ONLY applies if you previously purchased DIRECT from Adobe.