Messages

16

Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe to Stop Making Packaged Software

« on: May 06, 2013, 11:25:56 PM »

Rent-Only software sucks!

Yes, renting sucks...except that it doesn't, for the landlord.  When it comes right down to it, that's why this is happening.

And like it or not, software subscription models are an inevitable outcome of the digital age because the systems are now available to make it work and it's a tool against piracy.  All we can hope for, which is no different than at any time, is that healthy competition keeps things in check.  If, as people are screaming, Adobe's pricing is crazy, insane, unreasonable, etc. then we should see some competition eventually.  Bring it on and let's see how good our tools can get.

17

Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe to Stop Making Packaged Software

« on: May 06, 2013, 11:18:05 PM »

And no, you won't have any warning they are going away, unless you are an insider.  They DO go poof in the middle of the night.

Outside of the financial industry, it is very rare that a major corporation suddenly and without warning shuts it doors and leaves all customers out in the cold.

Meaning that if you take your photography business seriously, you have to freeze your baseline right here, and can no longer rely on their products beyond where we are at.  So there will be no updates, no new RAW converters.  That is the fast track to the grave for Adobe.  Self fulfilling prophecy.

Although I imagine that most of the younger folks will be seduced by the latest and greatest.  Until they get burned, that is.  But then, I was in the personal computer industry back when the 8080 was the latest and greatest, and Bill Gates was still in knickers.  So I've already been burned, and won't trust any of these companies.

The Cloud - a mainframe (even if it is made up of distributed elements) by any other name is still something outside your control.  Do you really want to go back there?  What's next - punch cards?

Again, the falling sky will get us all.  Good grief.

18

Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe to Stop Making Packaged Software

« on: May 06, 2013, 10:44:20 PM »

A couple of thoughts.

1. With the subscription only model, what incentive does that give Adobe to innovate and come up with NEW features and bug fixes? I mean, the main reason people updated was new features. If they have you the short and curlies renting the software, what incentive do they have then to come out with regular and meaningful updates on a regular basis?

That's reasonable concern.  The answer is competition.  If Adobe falls behind in features, performance, etc. competitors will rise up.

19

Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe to Stop Making Packaged Software

« on: May 06, 2013, 10:40:41 PM »

People please!  You never owned software, what you always bought was a license with only a time limited assurance of support, bug fixes, etc.  Then you upgrade to the next version at semi-regular intervals and so it goes on for eternity.

No, I bought that software and I expect it to function as purchased FOREVER - on my stand-alone machine that has no connectivity to the outside world.

Support, bug fixes, etc. are options I can chose to forgo, or pay for, my choice.

The real problem is that when Adobe goes bankrupt in 5 years and the license servers go off line, every one of their subscribers is SOL.  It's happened before, it will happen again.

Which is why the cloud subscription model is a loser for anyone who cares about what they are using/doing/counting on.  A business person (eg: professional photographer) who uses Adobe is rolling the dice with their livelihood.  Bad move.  You're not a secured creditor, they owe you nothing when they fail, and your customers are not going to be amused when you tell them that all those photos you were going to have for them aren't going to show up.

Onward and upward?  More like downward to the netherworld.

Oh bollocks!

The software that you currently own WILL work forever on your machine.  No one is forcing you to upgrade to CC.

You want choice... that was part of my original point, people are resistant to change, don't like new models, demand choice, demand control over everything.

Adobe goes bankrupt?  It could, but you images are not lost, your RAW files are not lost.  You have to back them all up just like you do now.  No difference there.  Ok, so you Adobe software stops working after a while but even under the current perpetual license versions you'd eventually (and within a relatively short time) have to move to another product to stay current with features etc.   And besides, when companies fail they don't go poof in the middle of the night... you'd have some warning... you're not going to suddenly have to tell your customers their photos have been lost forever in a black hole.

Boy oh boy, THE SKY IS FALLING!

20

Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe to Stop Making Packaged Software

« on: May 06, 2013, 10:31:37 PM »

Onward and upward dudes!  To the cloud!

Yes. But not at $50 a month! That is a ripoff. Plus it should be configurable. Just like now to pick and choose what one wants.

Under the new subscription model you can pick and choose what you want.  Currently it's $20 per month for individual apps and if you need 3 or more apps you can just pay $49 and get everything else for FREE if you want to use them.  You just have to compare what you are paying now, for upgrades, over time and compare to paying the monthly fee.

There are reports today that Adobe said it was going to reduce the single application price down to $10 per month when CC is released.  If so, if you use 4 or less apps you go for the singles, and once you hit 5 you pay the package price and get everything.

21

Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe to Stop Making Packaged Software

« on: May 06, 2013, 10:27:50 PM »

I GUARANTEE you, that as they add features or "upgrades" you can expect $75 - $100/ month for Creative Cloud.

Guarantee? That's pretty bold.  But ok, it is reasonable to expect that prices go up over time but if that's your assumption then the cost of one-time version upgrades would also go up.  At the end of the day the financial comparison is what you're paying now versus what you'll be under the new model.

If you're a PS only user your upgrade cost every two years was $300 (do I have that right or was it $200?) so your average monthly cost was $12.50 (more if an upgrade came out after 18 months).  Now you're paying $20 per month for PS... which is more and not insignificant but you're getting constant upgrades with new features instead of Adobe having to hold them back for a full new release, some cloud storage, and the right to install on two computers.  So there is extra value.  Whether those extras are worth an extra $7.50 per month to any particular user is hard to say.

EDIT... and there are reports they are planning to reduce the single app price to $10 per month.

22

Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe to Stop Making Packaged Software

« on: May 06, 2013, 09:09:46 PM »

Well, the usual human resistance to change is in full force today... photographers all throughout the Interwebs are losing their collective cool over this.  The sky is falling the sky is falling.

People please!  You never owned software, what you always bought was a license with only a time limited assurance of support, bug fixes, etc.  Then you upgrade to the next version at semi-regular intervals and so it goes on for eternity.

I get people's uncertainty and concern about costs.  For photographers who use nothing but PS and LR, the $49 per months is definitely higher than the 18-24 month upgrades.  If you didn't upgrade every release then sure, it's a fair bit more.  But you're getting more... new features, some cloud storage, access to other Adobe apps that maybe you'd like to use occasionally, and you get to install on two computers.  Not everyone has a desktop and a laptop so that's not a benefit to everyone but I think it may be for many/most photographers?

For people still using CS4 who are complaining, don't worry and keep using CS4.  Seriously, if you haven't upgraded yet you weren't going to anytime soon.  And, they clearly said they're going to keep selling CS6 as a stand-alone for the foreseeable future so you'll still be ok.

Many news reports state that Adobe claims they're going to reduce the price of single aps to $10/month but I can't find it only any official source.  If true, that's cheaper than upgrading PS once ever two years.

I dont' know guys and gals.  Doesn't seem so bad to me but I'm one who's long accepted that I don't really own anything anyway and have no issue that songs I buy digitally can't be left to my kids when I die.  Poor Bruce Willis and his extensive music collection will just have to suck it up.

If, as some are proclaiming, this is a big mistake for Adobe and it opens the competitive door to other photo applications then Adobe will tweak their pricing a bit.  Time will tell.  And life will go on.

Eventually, there will be features that even you die hard CS4 users are going to want and you'll be paying that monthly like a trained monkey... you pay your cable and phone bill every month right?  What bigger rip is there than that?  $12/day for 3 grande lattes?  $2/bottle for "natural spring water"?

Onward and upward dudes!  To the cloud!

23

Portrait / Re: Pretty bad...

« on: April 22, 2013, 10:34:24 AM »

Like others, I am scratching my head as to how they ever even saw these pictures. It only reinforces my resolve to never let my subjects see the original shots. I mostly shoot for family and friends, but even in those cases, I'm not letting them see everything I shoot.

To me, that's like going to buy a car, getting a truckload of parts delivered and being told to assemble it myself. It's only half the product. I know some photographers give their clients everything and I know that when they are waiving money in front of you, it's hard not to comply. But, I don't want my bad shots being posted for the whole world to see.

I think you've hit the nail on the head... money talks and it's not always easy, especially for a struggling photog, to turn down money over the risk that a not-so-good shot gets shown around as an example of your bad work.  Even if it's not the money, it might seem easier to give into the pressure of a client demanding ALL the photos on the basis that "the photos are of them and therefore it's their right to have them and decide for themselves if the photos are good or not".

24

Portrait / Re: Pretty bad...

« on: April 22, 2013, 09:53:57 AM »

What I wanna know is why did the photographer send them all his shots? Did he not even look at them at all? That in it self is proof he's no pro. Idiot. Talk about shooting yourself in the foot.

Perhaps the contract said ALL shots.... It could be that the photographer took 2000 shots, a dozen or so are bad... it could be a 99 percent hit rate... it could be .1 percent hit rate, we don't know.

Or they couple may have gotten into some argument or debate with the photographer and eventually she gave up, sighed deeply, shouted "oh bollocks", and just handed over ALL the shots and told the lovely couple to piss off.  Then, being the miserable type, the couple selected the worst shots and filed a lawsuit seeking the costs of a new reception just to get a free party with more cake.  People are like that.

25

Portrait / Re: Pretty bad...

« on: April 22, 2013, 09:09:16 AM »

I really have no comment on this particular case since we don't know all the details and haven't see all the photos that were delivered, etc.

But here's a question for the wedding togs... have you ever shot a wedding and the bride, groom, wedding party, guests were not co-operative and/or wouldn't make time for the shots you normally set up?  What was the outcome?

26

Software & Accessories / Re: Looks like we'll actually get it soon!

« on: April 17, 2013, 05:14:35 PM »

I wonder how it compares to dedicated de-convolving software (topaz, etc).

Same.  This is new feature to Photoshop but not a new technology.  Deconvolution techniques work very well for a single type of known movement such as a camera translation on one axis.  It works less well for complex (i.e. real world) camera movements. (according to my understanding, which could be flawed).

27

Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Re: What size Softbox

« on: April 08, 2013, 12:29:42 AM »

bigger the better

Almost always true!

28

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Does Canon really have a Flagship Stills Camera?

« on: March 31, 2013, 12:30:40 PM »

Flagship. You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means. 

 

29

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon 7100 has been anounced

« on: February 21, 2013, 06:08:09 PM »

Neuroanatomist,

I usually agree with the majority of your posts on here, but with this one I have to vehemently disagree.

Vehemently disagree?  That's pretty serious man!


Definition of VEHEMENT

: marked by forceful energy : powerful <a vehement wind>: as

a : intensely emotional : impassioned, fervid <vehement patriotism>

b (1) : deeply felt <a vehement suspicion> (2) : forcibly expressed <vehement denunciations>

c : bitterly antagonistic <a vehement debate>

30

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon 7100 has been anounced

« on: February 21, 2013, 04:00:05 PM »

I can't understand anyone who buys Canon products and then says they are "crap" etc. What kind of consumer are they if they buy stuff they don't like. Everybody makes a few mistakes, but for the most part, I like the stuff I buy. I wouldn't buy it if I didn't.

In general the votes that count the most are the ones we make with our money.  On the other hand, although rarely, people might with full awareness buy something they don't like if they have some other reason to do so... best available, can't afford what they do like, needs to be compatible with another product, etc.

Finally, I don't understand all the Nikon vs. Canon hate stuff – both the self-haters who buy Canon gear and participate in a Canon forum and then constantly complain about Canon. Nor do I understand those who act like Nikon is the worst thing ever and get all upset when Nikon produces a good quality product at a good price.

The answer to this is that it's not really hate just Internet whining, a need to justify one's own choices, they are trolls who just want to stir it up for fun, etc.