Photoshop

[Wardor]

If a person uses more than three adobe programs, it can actually be a pretty great deal. Personally, I use Photoshop, Lightroom, Dreamweaver/Muse and illustrator, with plans to move into Premiere Pro and Indesign in the very near future. Quite a deal for me personally. Not to mention upgrade savings. it rapidly becomes less attractive if a person only uses one or two programs.

Adobe seems to be targeting the user that has in the past pirated due to cost, like myself. I feel much better owning a legitimate licence for what I am using.

 

[Chuck Albertson]

Adobe's CEO elucidates a bit more here:

http://mashable.com/2013/05/06/adobe-ceo-interview-creative-cloud/

 

[Contarama]

This is all very interesting to me in the context of the discussion about DNG yesterday...

 

[brusby]

Adobe's CEO elucidates a bit more here:

http://mashable.com/2013/05/06/adobe-ceo-interview-creative-cloud/

When asked if the move was all about money the CEO responded by discussing Wall Street, apparently a reference to Adobe's stock valuation: "Among the new performance metrics Wall Street will look for in Adobe is 'number of subscribers' and 'annualized recurring revenue'."

Oh, and how we won't have to pay for packaging anymore. Funny I don't recall getting any packaging when I bought CS5 online a few years ago.

You'd think the CEO would have been better prepared for that question. Makes me feel like I need to roll up my pant legs cause the BS is getting deep.

 

[brusby]

You might want to do a web search for Kevin Lynch as he is/was likely behind this. He's off to apple to replace Jobs.

Thanks, I need to get more up to speed on this. You mean behind the cloud idea at Adobe?

 

[marcr1230]

As stated prior, it's very inefficient for the casual user or hobbyist.
I don't need an infinite monthly bill for something I use once in a while.
I would consider buying Photoshop outright, because I know I can use it for a number of years, but I don't want to be in a rental agreement.

Microsoft is trying this with Office 365. I just don't see that happening for non-commercial users. especially since there are enough functional/compatible alternatives to Office

 

[brusby]

I want *fewer* monthly bills, not more.

 

[lynnb]

This decision is useful for people able to claim subscription fees as tax deductibles, but hurts students, hobbyists and casual users who are on a budget. Anyone living on a budget knows that if personal finances go pear-shaped the first thing you do is cut unnecessary spending. Owning a computer and software enables you to keep on taking and post processing pictures even if you lose your job or income. You may not have the latest and greatest but you can still operate. A subscription model changes that. The risk is, you may lose the ability to access your Photoshop files and process them if you can't make the next payment.

When you own the software, you have control over when you upgrade and what platform you need to own to run it on.

What proportion of Adobe's customers are in each category? If the majority of customers are students, hobbyists and amateurs then this decision may backfire on them.

 

[drew.saunders]

The educational price for CS6 "Design Standard" is $200. The educational monthly robbery is $19.95 to start, and eventually $29.95. The weasel-CEO's statement that "nobody will pay more" isn't true for any educational customer. Looks like I'll upgrade to CS6 as soon as I can and never buy another Adobe product after that.

 

[TXForester]

I noticed they said it was a hybrid system. You have an app on the computer that can be used offline. Are you still going to pay a high price for that app and its license, then pay monthly for the upgrades if you want to take advantage of the cloud system?

 

[jsrockit]

I fear Lightroom will go the same way in version 5. 🙁 I HATE subscriptions.

 

[jsrockit]

I want *fewer* monthly bills, not more.

Exactly! 😡

 

[Bike Tourist]

I finally bought CS6 for the ACR which would decypher my X-Pro1's raw files, should I ever for whatever reason decide to use them (I like the jpegs just fine, thank you). In addition, I could see the way greedy corporate marketing people were guiding development. I figured CS6 was probably the end of the line for Photoshop iterations based in my computer.

Even though there are many aspects to Photoshop I don't use and even more, I suspect, that I don't understand, I feel comfortable using it.

The cloud is way up there where it can stay for all I care.

 

[user237428934]

I finally bought CS6 for the ACR which would decypher my X-Pro1's raw files, should I ever for whatever reason decide to use them (I like the jpegs just fine, thank you). In addition, I could see the way greedy corporate marketing people were guiding development. I figured CS6 was probably the end of the line for Photoshop iterations based in my computer.

Even though there are many aspects to Photoshop I don't use and even more, I suspect, that I don't understand, I feel comfortable using it.

The cloud is way up there where it can stay for all I care.

Did you try Phtoshop Elements (80 EUR) instead of Photoshop (1000 EUR)? Uses the same ACR version, only has less features after the raw conversion.

 

[thegman]

I think the subscription model is basically a decent one, it spreads the cost, and you always get to be on the latest versions/patches/security updates.

Taking away the option of buying outright is dumbassery of the highest order though.

 

[Murchu]

Only way to combat piracy, I think. The issue I have is with what Adobe still think photoshop is worth. I am hoping Lightroom does not go the same way, but rather than remain dependent on the product of a greedy corporation, think I will be modifying my editing workflow to reduce my dependence on such software. I have too many image files anyway, so converting the ones of merit to tiff's, and then editing in a program of my choice, would seem a much better way to go, for me.

 

[sevo]

I think the subscription model is basically a decent one, it spreads the cost, and you always get to be on the latest versions/patches/security updates.

Why would I care? The speed of improvement has slowed - for the past four or five versions there haven't really been any compelling new features other than the forced obsoletion of not making new ACR versions available for old PS versions.

I've owned Photoshop 2, 3.5 (in the SGI version only), 4, 7 and CS3 - and PS is the piece of Adobe software I have upgraded the most (I have only upgraded Illustrator once in twenty years). That is, I have skipped more than two out of three updates. Even if the pricing keeps the same, a subscription model would triplicate my cost.

 

[user237428934]

Roughly calculated the monthly fee for PS is 1/40 of the original buying price. If I calculate that for LR then it would be a fee of 3.35 EUR / month. No problem with that, especially if I consider that I made every upgrade from LR 1,2,3 to 4.

 

[Exdsc]

Adobe abandoning individual users (photographers mostly) in favor of its core customer base (businesses).

This could only mean one thing, Adobe no longer has confidence in photography market and considering the data coming in for camera sales, its not surprising.

 

[Bike Tourist]

Did you try Phtoshop Elements (80 EUR) instead of Photoshop (1000 EUR)? Uses the same ACR version, only has less features after the raw conversion.

That probably would have been the intelligent solution. I'm not guilty of that.