Photo_Smith
Well-known
Absolutely correct Stewart, the 'but you don't understand-it's the cloud' type arguments are belied by your correct reading of the situation.
thegman
Veteran
It is nine a month the first year, twenty the second, and something yet to be determined after that...
The issue is not really the money (but of course, if Adobe decides to turn greedy, they could raise the bar above the pain threshold at any time) but the implicit risks of operating a business entirely dependent on third party support:
What if Adobe ceases to exist?
What if Adobe rises prices past the level where you can still live on your work?
What if Adobe decides to quit still photography support?
What if the US government decides that the part of the world you live in is on a embargo list?
What if you declare insolvency? Can you still access (and sell) your past works if your bank account has been locked down, or do you go into death spiral mode?
If you temporarily quit photography and return later, will you still be able to access your legacy files if you haven't been in on all intermediate upgrades? (Adobe already had a similar issue with Audition)
What if you die? Will your heirs still be able to access your works, or do they effectively lose ownership as they are refused to step into your cloud account?
I suppose you deal with it when it happens. If you're worried about file compatibility, save out as any one of the open formats. Any format where there is an open specification can be implemented by a competent programmer, it will not have anything to do with companies still running or whatever.
Works access? Just save them onto a hard disk, DVD, or cloud service just as you always have done.
I think there is a lot of confusion about these cloud services. The files are exactly the same, you can put them anywhere you want. You can back them up to another cloud service, you can put them on your hard disk etc. Adobe cannot lock you out of those files, the technology simple does not exist to do that. The only real difference with the cloud Adobe Suite and the old one is:
1) You pay monthly to rent it, rather than pay a one off every time you want a new version.
2) It verifies that it's a valid license online more frequently than it used to.
You can store all your files in a Adobe's system if you want, but you don't have to, and there is no particular reason to.
In the event that Adobe goes bust, and someone does not buy up the suite, then you move onto something else, same as people did with Kodachrome.
willie_901
Veteran
What if Adobe ceases to exist?
Find an alternate product. Your images are on your system. The only issue with CC is you would have to do this sooner rather than later
What if Adobe rises prices past the level where you can still live on your work?
please see previous answer.
What if Adobe decides to quit still photography support?
Please see first answer.
What if the US government decides that the part of the world you live in is on a embargo list?
If you reside where this is a significant risk, you should abandon Adobe Creative Cloud products now.
What if you declare insolvency? Can you still access (and sell) your past works if your bank account has been locked down, or do you go into death spiral mode?
Yes, There is no reason or mandate to store any of your intellectual property where it is out of your control. Of course you would have to understand storing images in PSD format is foolish.
If you temporarily quit photography and return later, will you still be able to access your legacy files if you haven't been in on all intermediate upgrades? (Adobe already had a similar issue with Audition)
Yes. Just store everything locally and avoid the PSD file format.
What if you die? Will your heirs still be able to access your works, or do they effectively lose ownership as they are refused to step into your cloud account?
Yes they do if you did not use Adobe's remote servers for image archiving.
Recently services are available that allows family members or your agents to access all your password protected information after your death. The issue of access after death or incapacitation is important and easy to address.
You seem to be confounding mandatory storage of your intellectual property on Adobe's servers with mandatory verification of your license on a monthly basis.
Save everything as tiffs or jpegs on your property.
In my case I understand anything I have not printed or exported as a jpeg will never be seen again when I die.
What you would loose if the ability to license CC is lost for any reason is money and time invested in Actions and Plug Ins.
For the record I have no respect for Adobe. I use LR and PSE because they. make my life easier. I avoid all other Adobe products. I think Adobe's customer service is an insult. Adobe's Flash is an abomination.
Find an alternate product. Your images are on your system. The only issue with CC is you would have to do this sooner rather than later
What if Adobe rises prices past the level where you can still live on your work?
please see previous answer.
What if Adobe decides to quit still photography support?
Please see first answer.
What if the US government decides that the part of the world you live in is on a embargo list?
If you reside where this is a significant risk, you should abandon Adobe Creative Cloud products now.
What if you declare insolvency? Can you still access (and sell) your past works if your bank account has been locked down, or do you go into death spiral mode?
Yes, There is no reason or mandate to store any of your intellectual property where it is out of your control. Of course you would have to understand storing images in PSD format is foolish.
If you temporarily quit photography and return later, will you still be able to access your legacy files if you haven't been in on all intermediate upgrades? (Adobe already had a similar issue with Audition)
Yes. Just store everything locally and avoid the PSD file format.
What if you die? Will your heirs still be able to access your works, or do they effectively lose ownership as they are refused to step into your cloud account?
Yes they do if you did not use Adobe's remote servers for image archiving.
Recently services are available that allows family members or your agents to access all your password protected information after your death. The issue of access after death or incapacitation is important and easy to address.
You seem to be confounding mandatory storage of your intellectual property on Adobe's servers with mandatory verification of your license on a monthly basis.
Save everything as tiffs or jpegs on your property.
In my case I understand anything I have not printed or exported as a jpeg will never be seen again when I die.
What you would loose if the ability to license CC is lost for any reason is money and time invested in Actions and Plug Ins.
For the record I have no respect for Adobe. I use LR and PSE because they. make my life easier. I avoid all other Adobe products. I think Adobe's customer service is an insult. Adobe's Flash is an abomination.
rogue_designer
Reciprocity Failure
The biggest thing for me is that this removes some of the impetus for Adobe to improve their product and support. They were rewarded by users buying new versions when there were compelling reasons to do so. Now they can just collect rent with a bare minimum of maintenance. Like a barely responsible landlord.
It does mitigate the marketing driven upgrades, but hurts the innovation driven ones.
Ultimately until there is a viable competitor in the market, I don't see much any of us can do about it. Which is depressing. It's Quark eXpress all over again.
It does mitigate the marketing driven upgrades, but hurts the innovation driven ones.
Ultimately until there is a viable competitor in the market, I don't see much any of us can do about it. Which is depressing. It's Quark eXpress all over again.
thegman
Veteran
There is still Quark Xpress for DTP.
sevo
Fokutorendaburando
So how is a designer going to access the intellectual property stored on his computer if the license verification fails? Please don't rell me "store as JPEG or TIFF". All gained productivity in Photoshop since the mid nineties was in the growing ability to go back to and branch off any past version of your work - if saving in PSD is a no do, we may as well stick with PS 2.5 (the last version that did not have layers - and it did install off floppies, too).
sepiareverb
genius and moron
People will lose money from time to time because their internet is down and the software will lock. My internet was down the day before yesterday and again yesterday off and on. I was working with PS & ID, having trouble sending emails to several people because the connection couldn't last long enough to send an email, let alone an attachment. Had my PS & ID been locked I'd have been stuck. Won;t happen often, but it will happen. It would piss me off. But, working on the files in iPhoto & Pages would probably be just as good.
beegee675
Member
Here's a source...
Here's a source...
Could easily be that Adobe is wrapping their arms around this one, too...
http://www.dpbestflow.org/DNG
Here's a source...
Could easily be that Adobe is wrapping their arms around this one, too...
http://www.dpbestflow.org/DNG
user237428934
User deletion pending
We were initially talking a about the new PS CC. This an add on app for tablets.
No one will in the next 5-8 years bring a software on the market that relies on bringing masses of data on a cloud storage. Can you imagine a photographer coming home from a photo shoot with 300 images of 35MB each and he has to upload 10GB of data before he can even look through his photos to select the ones to work on? Today the upload capabilities are too limited and they will be too limited in 5 years.
I read the article you linked. The idea sounds smart. I load raw files on my tablet and work with this tablet Lightroom where I can select files and do basic editing. This metadata can be stored in a cloud service. When I come home I load the files on my powerful computer from the cards and apply the changes that I already did on the tablet. That's my interpretation of the article.
MaxElmar
Well-known
No it shouldn't. If one is going to pay for the included cloud storage, one might well be tempted to use it. So yes, we damn well should be talking about "constant internet access for PS" as the alternative is to pay for something one does not intend to use.
user237428934
User deletion pending
Should I worry about the 3 of 5 seats in my new car that I almost never use but paid for?
MaxElmar
Well-known
Should I worry about the 3 of 5 seats in my new car that I almost never use but paid for?
Well, at least you actually received the seats, whether or not they get used. How about you pay for the seats, but they keep your extra car seats at the dealership - don't worry, they'll be open when you need them.
willie_901
Veteran
If you insist on using PSD as an archive format then you are willingingly limiting your options to use alternate products.
If the license does not verify for 60 days, there is obviously an issue for PSD files. However, you have time to save all your finished work in a non-proprietary format.
At some point in the future your OS won't support PS 6 CS. Then the risk of relying only on PSD files is unacceptable. Even then one can buy non-Adobe PSD conversion software. Of course these products do not necessarily support branching off from past work. Since I am LR centric, I am unaware of how other layer-based programs support branched-off work after importing PSD files. It is possible PSE will remain a non-CC product for a long time. For photographers some of the branched-off value would be retained. In fact I would not be surprised if Adobe's PSE profits grow due to the CC mandate.
I doubt "all gained productivity" is literally accurate. Loosing access to unflattened PSD files is inconvenient. But branching off to create new work from unflattened PSD files only encompasses a one aspect of the all the value-added utility in PS since version 2.5. But this is moot. If you abandon PS-CC you eventually loose the branched-off value sooner or later.
sepiareverb
genius and moron
Connection speeds in much of rural Vermont are barely capable for email let alone more than that. Minutes for an even slightly image-heavy web page to load is standard for many here. Granted, the market is in the cities, but before CC anyone could run CS given an adequate machine on their desk. I dislike the idea of so much moving to internet based because rural users will always be at a disadvantage. We got 3G here two years ago, the house I lived in before this one still cannot get anything resembling a fast connection, and will likely never have a wired connection. A house on the grid on a town road, but a small town with too few people for anyone to invest in the infrastructure. Dial-up? Sure thing. Radio/Satellite based Internet meant watching a Netflix 'streaming' video required 10 minutes of buffering every 10 minutes of video. And it looked like crap. Sigh. Rant over.
MaxElmar
Well-known
Another reason for "talking about constant internet access for PS" is that, while we are assured that Photoshop CC will start and run "offline" we have very little information about any individual features that may require an internet connection to work. Thom Hogan is reporting that that nifty "Camera Movement Reduction" feature in CC needs to talk to a remote server to work as advertised... Obviously, the collaborative and communications features aren't going to work without a connection.
By the way, I'm not saying 'Don't buy CC' - I'm saying "Know what you're buying" - "think about what you are buying" - and, if it's not a good fit, consider your alternatives. Many people have been buying PS for years (if not decades) without seriously analyzing the return on investment. That time should be ending now.
By the way, I'm not saying 'Don't buy CC' - I'm saying "Know what you're buying" - "think about what you are buying" - and, if it's not a good fit, consider your alternatives. Many people have been buying PS for years (if not decades) without seriously analyzing the return on investment. That time should be ending now.
thegman
Veteran
One good point of the software "rental" system is that it's basically platform agnostic. If you decide to move from Windows to Mac (or the other way round) you don't have to buy software all over again, you just move.
I do think that making the rental system the only way is risky, customer-hostile, and a little inflexible, but it's not all bad, really.
I do think that making the rental system the only way is risky, customer-hostile, and a little inflexible, but it's not all bad, really.
rogue_designer
Reciprocity Failure
Before inDesign, however, designers were pretty much at Quark's mercy (Pagemaker was not a real competitor, and Framemaker was a niche).
Creative Suite is very nearly at that point now - there is little on the market that effectively competes with Photoshop/Illustrator/InDesign. I'm afraid until a real competitor arrives, we're pretty much at Adobe's mercy to become too expensive/poorly upgraded/unresponsive to the market - and Adobe will keep collecting rent from us - unless we all decide to just not upgrade from CS6 and use that until it is entirely unsupported by the industry.
Anyway, that's just my $.02 as a working designer.
sepiareverb
genius and moron
user237428934
User deletion pending
Funny how people react on the word cloud. I got my first mail account in 1995 at AOL. Hosted mail accounts, ftp-servers for file upload, photo hosting sites. All cloud services long before someone called them this way.