So how is that Subscription Service working out for Adobe?

[Glenn NK]

Some people buy their vehicles, some lease them.  The best option depends on the circumstances not dogma.

[KatManDEW]

Some people buy their vehicles, some lease them.  The best option depends on the circumstances not dogma.

Adobe doesn't offer any options. Rental or nothing. And nothing if you fall on hard times and can't pay the rent.

[Glenn NK]

Clarifying my position - I use Lightroom - which can be purchased or leased.

Further to to the analogy, Ford isn't the only option and neither is Adobe.

What I'm noticing on forums (five or six I regularly check in on) is that more and more photographers are not complaining as much about the "big change" from Adobe, and quite a few are completely sold on it (subscription model).

C'est la guerre.

[chez]

Clarifying my position - I use Lightroom - which can be purchased or leased.

Further to to the analogy, Ford isn't the only option and neither is Adobe.

What I'm noticing on forums (five or six I regularly check in on) is that more and more photographers are not complaining as much about the "big change" from Adobe, and quite a few are completely sold on it (subscription model).

C'est la guerre.

I'm seeing the same. Why continually argue the same points. Either jump in and subscribe, use what you currently use or look for something else. Really quite simple.

[Rick Popham]

What I'm noticing on forums (five or six I regularly check in on) is that more and more photographers are not complaining as much about the "big change" from Adobe, and quite a few are completely sold on it (subscription model).

C'est la guerre.

 While people may be tired of complaining and "arguing the same points", it doesn't mean they're sold on the subscription model.  I would certainly choose a perpetual upgrade over a subscription -- every time.

[KatManDEW]

If I was happy with the subscription model, I certainly wouldn't be wasting my time online defending it. Unless Adobe was paying me to do so.

If I got what I wanted, I would be happily be going on with my life. You can't expect change if you don't speak up. If I was happy with something, I would save my breath for things I was unhappy with.

I'm getting along just fine with LR and CS6 for now. They do everything I need, and then some... But I fully plan to have to move on when I get my next new camera, and have no ACR support for it unless I start paying monthly extortion for more than I need, to get what I need. I would pay for ACR updates, but I positively will not pay $10 per month just to get raw support for a new camera.

I personally believe that Adobe has realized that they cannot come up with enough compelling new features (other than bells and whistles) to add to future versions of Photoshop, to justify people paying big bucks for those future upgrades. They've hit the end of the gravy train, and they needed a scheme to provide a revenue stream in the future. They can't maintain the revenue they're used to just by selling ACR updates.

I have some great cameras that are serving me well. But when the next version of one of them becomes available, it's goodbye Adobe, because I won't have ACR for that camera.  So I'm carefully researching my options, so I will be ready when that time comes.

I'll bet Adobe is counting on the subscription holdouts knuckling under when they get new cameras and need raw support. They can count me out.

[Schewe]

...But I fully plan to have to move on when I get my next new camera, and have no ACR support for it unless I start paying monthly extortion for more than I need, to get what I need. I would pay for ACR updates, but I positively will not pay $10 per month just to get raw support for a new camera.

I guess you haven't heard about the free DNG Converter that provides backwards compatibility with new cameras and older software? Did I mention Adobe offers this for free?

[KatManDEW]

I guess you haven't heard about the free DNG Converter that provides backwards compatibility with new cameras and older software? Did I mention Adobe offers this for free?

Yes, I know about it. Don't have time for that clumsy work around.

Give customers purchasing options, or lose them.

[Schewe]

Yes, I know about it. Don't have time for that clumsy work around.

Uh huh...so, because you don't have time for a "clumsy work around" Adobe should be all aquiver at the prospect that you'll leave Adobe for some other solution? Really? Are you in the habit of cutting your nose off to spite your face? Go ahead and look for an un-clumsy workaround that doesn't include ACR/LR...try Capture One or one of the many 3d party raw processors. Heck, try the software that comes with your new, as yet unreleased camera. Heck, everybody knows the camera makers make the best raw processing software :~)

[xpatUSA]

Currently, my best images do indeed come from the manufacturer's converter (Sigma Photo Pro 3.5) saving as a 16-bit ProPhot TIFF passed on to RawTherapee 4.0.11. FastStone viewer works well for snapshots. A simple life for one who does not print or post epic images in competitions 

cheers,

[Glenn NK]

If I was happy with the subscription model, I certainly wouldn't be wasting my time online defending it. Unless Adobe was paying me to do so.

If I got what I wanted, I would be happily be going on with my life. You can't expect change if you don't speak up. If I was happy with something, I would save my breath for things I was unhappy with.

Everyone has a right to be happy or not with whatever situation they encounter in life (being philosophical here).

I might suggest though that fighting the current situation (subscription model) seems to be pretty much a waste of time and effort.  Maybe that's why I see fewer complaints and more compliance?

I'm not suggesting that you don't have a right to fight it, I'm suggesting that you will get nowhere.

[john beardsworth]

Yes, I know about it. Don't have time for that clumsy work around.

Give customers purchasing options, or lose them.

As you use LR, you can carry on buying upgrades for updated raw support. Who really needs ACR?

John

[Rhossydd]

I guess you haven't heard about the free DNG Converter that provides backwards compatibility with new cameras and older software? Did I mention Adobe offers this for free?

They offer it for free, now.
Will it still be free in five years time or just part of the CC package ? Who knows ? I doubt Adobe even do. It's probably such an insignificant little utility it's not on their radar at the moment. If they find out it's being used to avoid buying subscriptions it will probably stop being free.

[Schewe]

They offer it for free, now.

So, you doubt Thomas Knoll? (the person responsible for creating DNG Converter).

Really? You wanna go down that road?

Ya might wanna pick a different victim since Thomas tends to do the "right thing" for users.

Just sayin' this ain't a hill you wanna die on.

Thomas is pretty much above reproach. (unless you have some news I ain't aware of–do you?)

Otherwise, shut the fu@#k up bud.
(seriously, unless you have certain knowledge, shut the fu@#k  up).

[Rhossydd]

So, you doubt Thomas Knoll? (the person responsible for creating DNG Converter).
Really? You wanna go down that road?
Ya might wanna pick a different victim since Thomas tends to do the "right thing" for users.
Just sayin' this ain't a hill you wanna die on.
Thomas is pretty much above reproach. (unless you have some news I ain't aware of–do you?)
Otherwise, shut the fu@#k up bud.
(seriously, unless you have certain knowledge, shut the fu@#k  up).

YAWN.

This isn't about any individual. Thomas doesn't set the pricing, it's about the Adobe corporation. They've swapped and changed policies on a regular basis over the last few years to suit their commercial needs. Suggesting that any particular utility will remain free is just simply speculation.

[chez]

They offer it for free, now.
Will it still be free in five years time or just part of the CC package ? Who knows ? I doubt Adobe even do. It's probably such an insignificant little utility it's not on their radar at the moment. If they find out it's being used to avoid buying subscriptions it will probably stop being free.

Yep, and the sky is falling...run for the hills. Pessimistic view I might add. Show me a single software product that guarantees anything 5 years from now. Heck 90% of these products won't even be around 5 years from now. Which one are you going to hitch your horse to?

[chez]

YAWN.

This isn't about any individual. Thomas doesn't set the pricing, it's about the Adobe corporation. They've swapped and changed policies on a regular basis over the last few years to suit their commercial needs. Suggesting that any particular utility will remain free is just simply speculation.

More so speculation that this free utility won't be free in the years to come.

[Rhossydd]

More so speculation that this free utility won't be free in the years to come.

I'm not suggesting that at all. Just pointing out that whilst it might be free now, that may not be the case in future.

[KatManDEW]

Once again, I don't understand why the folks who are happy with the subscription model would care what those who don't like it think. I might suggest though that fighting with the people who don't like the subscription model seems to be pretty much a waste of time and effort.

Move on and enjoy getting what you wanted, and let the folks who didn't get what they want voice their opinions.

[KatManDEW]

Uh huh...so, because you don't have time for a "clumsy work around" Adobe should be all aquiver at the prospect that you'll leave Adobe for some other solution? Really? Are you in the habit of cutting your nose off to spite your face? Go ahead and look for an un-clumsy workaround that doesn't include ACR/LR...try Capture One or one of the many 3d party raw processors. Heck, try the software that comes with your new, as yet unreleased camera. Heck, everybody knows the camera makers make the best raw processing software :~)

Why the sarcasm and personal attacks. What did I do to offend you personally?