Reluctant CC subscriber very impressed ... so far so good

[Isaac]

If you have a problem with the subscription-limited model, fine, just don't say it's because there's nothing new.

Me? Perhaps you meant to answer Simon Garrett.

[john beardsworth]

Me? Perhaps you meant to answer Simon Garrett.

Sorry, while I answered your question, there I used "you" in the sense of "one".

[Simon Garrett]

Since June 17: real-time asset generation, whatever that is.

Yes. Whatever that is.  Well, nice to know things are happening, even if not of much relevance to me!

[Simon Garrett]

That may develop over time, as Adobe grows to depend on subscription revenue...

Personally I remain a little sceptical about that.  Yes, it's easier for Adobe to phase in updates without having to link them to chargeable updates.  But IMHO with the rental model there is less financial incentive for them to innovate on mature products where there is comparatively little competition, compared to less mature products or those facing lots of competition. I expect to see Adobe concentrate their effort on the latter two areas.  From Adobe's perspective it's the sensible thing to do. 

But we'll see.  I've subscribed anyway.

[digitaldog]

I am a CS6 user and found ACR 2012 a lot better than before.. but can anyone tell me if ACR 2013 is a lot better than ACR 2012?
(especially for me as a nikon d800e user)

Are you referring to Process Version (2012)? Or just what's new since 2012, big difference.

Here's my take and don't ask why <g>. I think Adobe, and it's top dog (TK with help from EC) really intend to continue to make ACR and it's brother Lightroom more and more poweful and useful for photographers. The rest of Photshop proper, probably not so much. It's such a huge product with so many different users, it will continue to address a larger need that is thus far more splintered. ACR and LR are focused, the people drivng the buss (and each team is different!) at least are looking at the photo process.

[rasterdogs]

I can be a cynical whiner:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=84749.0

Just for some balance, it seems fair to mention that I am so far Very Impressed with CC, especially ACR. Nice job, Eric C. and the rest of the team.

Actually, I wish I'd upgraded from CS5/LR4 sooner.

Note that I really haven't used CC-PS itself that much.  What little I've had to use so far ... like the Print dialog ... seems improved.

For me, I want to use ACR/LR more and more, and PS less and less. I really, really want to have DNG's as my "Master" and not have bloated .tif's hogging my SSD.

Eventually, I think LR with PV-20/20 will be sufficient for this non-pro hobby'ist, if and when I cancel my CC subscription.

Obviously, YMMV.

I'll echo this vote of confidence. 

I've been on the fence about Photoshop in general and CC in particular. The last version of PS that I owned (prior to signing up for CC) was CS3.  Over the past 18 months or so I'd abandoned using PS and convinced myself that LR was all I needed. Using PS CC is a refreshing realization. The tool and interface have certainly evolved. I'll probably go into PS CC to finalize ~20% of my images but I'll be happy to do so.

Smart objects are da bomb!