July 29, 2014, 01:08:38 AM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Ladislav

Pages: 1 [2] 3
16
Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe to Stop Making Packaged Software
« on: May 10, 2013, 07:46:28 PM »
In response to other postings regarding Scott Kelby's Q&A - Scott says that at some point in the future if you don't like an increase in price you can simply stop paying.  This is utter nonsense since you then lose access to your data!

That is utter nonsense. If you decide to stop your subscription just batch convert your PSD's to an open format.

Could you tell me which open format supports everything the PS does and an converter that will actually convert my psd into that? I would seriously love to have that

The point is: It is not about the format. The format itself is described on Adobe developers portal. I'm not sure if it is a complete specification but if it is not it will be fairly quickly reverse enginnered. But the PSD file is nothing without Photoshop. PSD is just set of data about layers, masks and their configuration. If you want to load that data and make changes you need Photoshop or software implementing the same algorithms (some of them can be Adobe's intellectual property). If you don't want to make changes, you don't need to store your photos in PSD format.

Who said anything about photo's? What about designs? Painted Artwork?  ???

Well I'm on the forum about photography so I'm talking mainly about photos. Are you a professional making money by Photoshop? In such case $240 per year should be really small investment for you which you can easily put to your costs. Even as hobbyist from much poorer country I can imagine paying that if I really need Photoshop to get the best from my hobby.

The rant about Adobe's business decission reminds me all rants about Canon vs. Nikon, about Canon not releasing something, etc. The core of these rants is to make some disappointment look like a global problem where there is actually no problem at all.

Nothing has changed for people who already own any Photoshop license. They don't need to subscribe if they don't want to. Their product still works and its lifetime will one day end in the same way as it would end for any other SW product. They will just don't have any option to upgrade without subscription. Not choosing to subscribe will not invalidate their existing license or existing PSD files. Those who don't have licence yet can either quickly buy CS6, use subscription or simly don't care.

Money isn't the main issue, It's the transfer of power from end users to adobe. It's a principle that after spending thousands for software, its not enough for adobe, we must pay the same $$$$ and now own nothing.

Idea of software ownership is quite fragile anyway. It is similar to owning movie on HD DVD. You paid for it, you own the license but buying a player to use your license is more and more complicated. Subscription model gives you always the last version with all features and fixes and for the operating system you are using at the moment (moreover I read somewhere that it gives you license for two computers - good if you have a workstation and laptop).

People don't like changes and subscription model is a big change in the way how we get SW. It will become more common in the future and people will accept it eventually.

17
Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe to Stop Making Packaged Software
« on: May 10, 2013, 07:24:49 PM »
In response to other postings regarding Scott Kelby's Q&A - Scott says that at some point in the future if you don't like an increase in price you can simply stop paying.  This is utter nonsense since you then lose access to your data!

That is utter nonsense. If you decide to stop your subscription just batch convert your PSD's to an open format.

Could you tell me which open format supports everything the PS does and an converter that will actually convert my psd into that? I would seriously love to have that

The point is: It is not about the format. The format itself is described on Adobe developers portal. I'm not sure if it is a complete specification but if it is not it will be fairly quickly reverse enginnered. But the PSD file is nothing without Photoshop. PSD is just set of data about layers, masks and their configuration. If you want to load that data and make changes you need Photoshop or software implementing the same algorithms (some of them can be Adobe's intellectual property). If you don't want to make changes, you don't need to store your photos in PSD format.

Who said anything about photo's? What about designs? Painted Artwork?  ???

Well I'm on the forum about photography so I'm talking mainly about photos. Are you a professional making money by Photoshop? In such case $240 per year should be really small investment for you which you can easily put to your costs. Even as hobbyist from much poorer country I can imagine paying that if I really need Photoshop to get the best from my hobby.

The rant about Adobe's business decission reminds me all rants about Canon vs. Nikon, about Canon not releasing something, etc. The core of these rants is to make some disappointment look like a global problem where there is actually no problem at all.

Nothing has changed for people who already own any Photoshop license. They don't need to subscribe if they don't want to. Their product still works and its lifetime will one day end in the same way as it would end for any other SW product. They will just don't have any option to upgrade without subscription. Not choosing to subscribe will not invalidate their existing license or existing PSD files. Those who don't have licence yet can either quickly buy CS6, use subscription or simly don't care.

18
Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe Creative Cloud - Adobe Owns you!
« on: May 10, 2013, 07:06:52 PM »
Am I the only one who thinks $10 a month is a pretty good price for PS?

Sure, If your willing to pay that for the rest of your life or never open your PSD's again.

Seriously, how often do you open "old PSD"? I considet PSD only as intermediate format. Input (RAW) and output (Tiff) matter.

Quite often...

So you want to have Photoshop or other tool which is able to open PSD in your workflow anyway, don't you? You generally chose to be fully dependent on this format. Looks like Adobe owns you for a long time ...

Not really, I still have my CS3. PSD's have advantages no other format provides.

I'll feel no remorse when those CC prices become inflated for you and the many others doing so. Adobe will own your wallet for a long time....

Actually I don't own Photoshop and I haven't subscribed yet. I thought about it last year because the subscription was only affordable option for me but I then found out that I don't need full Photoshop. Lightroom + Photoshop Elements + Nik collection work just fine for me so far. If I need big Photoshop I will just rent it for necessary time, do what I need and probably never open those intermediate PSD files again.

The only thing I dislike a lot about subscription model is different price outside of US.

19
Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe to Stop Making Packaged Software
« on: May 10, 2013, 06:53:15 PM »
In response to other postings regarding Scott Kelby's Q&A - Scott says that at some point in the future if you don't like an increase in price you can simply stop paying.  This is utter nonsense since you then lose access to your data!

That is utter nonsense. If you decide to stop your subscription just batch convert your PSD's to an open format.

Could you tell me which open format supports everything the PS does and an converter that will actually convert my psd into that? I would seriously love to have that

The point is: It is not about the format. The format itself is described on Adobe developers portal. I'm not sure if it is a complete specification but if it is not it will be fairly quickly reverse engineered. But the PSD file is nothing without Photoshop. PSD is just set of data about layers, masks and their configuration. If you want to load that data and make changes you need Photoshop or software implementing the same algorithms (some of them can be Adobe's intellectual property). If you don't want to make changes, you don't need to store your photos in PSD format.

20
Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe Creative Cloud - Adobe Owns you!
« on: May 10, 2013, 06:32:26 PM »
Am I the only one who thinks $10 a month is a pretty good price for PS?

Sure, If your willing to pay that for the rest of your life or never open your PSD's again.

Seriously, how often do you open "old PSD"? I considet PSD only as intermediate format. Input (RAW) and output (Tiff) matter.

Quite often...

So you want to have Photoshop or other tool which is able to open PSD in your workflow anyway, don't you? You generally chose to be fully dependent on this format. Looks like Adobe owns you for a long time ...

21
Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe Creative Cloud - Adobe Owns you!
« on: May 10, 2013, 05:51:52 PM »
Am I the only one who thinks $10 a month is a pretty good price for PS?

Sure, If your willing to pay that for the rest of your life or never open your PSD's again.

Seriously, how often do you open "old PSD"? I considet PSD only as intermediate format. Input (RAW) and output (Tiff) matter.

22
Software & Accessories / Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software
« on: May 07, 2013, 12:21:09 PM »
For hobbyists? Photoshop Elements. It has more features than most of warez Photoshop users will ever need. It also has limitations like 8bit processing only but it costs like one or two months of subscription to CC.

For professionals who makes money by photography? Either live with a new subscription model (that's just change in your costs) or buy CS6 now and wait what will happen in next few years.

23
Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe to Stop Making Packaged Software
« on: May 07, 2013, 03:42:17 AM »
Subscription scheme is only for big professional products. I really don't believe it will target end user products (Photoshop Elements and Premiere Elements) and Lightroom because they have completely different pricing strategy.

24
Reviews / Re: Review - Canon EF 24-70 f/4L IS
« on: May 06, 2013, 08:06:17 AM »
This lens has one significant issue: Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC which is around 30% cheaper in my country. Professionals will probably take the absolute best = Canon 24-70 f/2.8 Mk. II and hobbyists will either take the absolute best (if they can afford it) or the best in cost/performance ratio = Tamron. IMO the main market for this lens will be using it as a new kit lens for FF bodies.

25
...  Lens range from 14mm through 500MM IS original version, plus zoom, ....

According to version comparison testing of > 400mm focal length is only feature of the Pro version.

I bought the Pro version this week ...

26
Reviews / Re: Review - The Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS
« on: April 24, 2013, 08:28:25 AM »
Great review!

I bought this lens month ago and I love it. I initially didn't want this lens. I was looking for Tamron 70-200 f2.8 VC and Tamron 70-300 VC to supplement my Tamron 24-70 VC but when I found this lens among used items on web site of my local retailer, I gave it a try. It cost me 70% of the new one and it still had one year of warranty. I also bought a tripod collar - Canon really can make money from nothing. The collar cost more than 50 f1.8! I somehow found the collar quite good for handling the camera with the lens.

My copy has IMHO little bit loose focus ring and IS makes a strange noise when starts and stops operating (it is only audible in silent environments) but otherwise it is flawless. I use it for animals (dogs, birds, zoo), flowers and close details in general. It has a very compact size (and pleasing weight) and fits to quite small backpack together with body, other lens and external flash.

I'm beginner and I still shoot with Rebel (and slowly collecting money for 6D) so I cannot compare IQ or build quality with other L lenses. This is my first one but it really make a great impression and I doubt it will be the last L lens I will ever buy (I already itch for 100L f2.8 ).

Edit: It is also lens which makes me think again about moving to FF. Extra reach on APS-C is a great bonus.

27
Software & Accessories / Re: Pixma Pro 9000 II prints are dark
« on: April 08, 2013, 03:08:29 PM »
I'm just fighting the similar issue when printing from LR 4.4 (prints are dark and partially desaturated) but my setup is Pixma MG 5450 + two DELL IPS screens (not Mac). I just thought that my screens are incorrectly calibrated and that using calibration probe could solve it. I'm surprised it doesn't.

28
Lenses / Re: Which Lens to buy
« on: April 04, 2013, 09:48:53 AM »
If you are going to start your own photography business the second body can be helpful just because it is backup. If anything goes wrong with your primary body when working on contract you still have a backup.

I would not invest into 200 f/2.8 if you already have 70-200 f/2.8. 17-40 f/4 is lens I'm considering myself but reviews I have read so far didn't convinced me yet. Reviews usually considers its wide end quite weak in corners on FF. Perhaps looking for some wide prime (even Samyang) would be more interesting if you want wide angle lens for landscapes.

29
Canon General / Re: 24-70Mk2 fell off my 5DMk3 and smashed
« on: March 31, 2013, 06:06:14 AM »
I pay $7.60 per year per $1K of covered gear.  As with all insurance, rates will vary based on your location.

That again reminds me that I still live in "emerging market" (central Europe,  part of EU). I just checked websites of few insurance companies - none of them offers such insurance (at least not as a standard service offered on their web sites). One got quite close with musical instruments but the upper bound was $2k-$2,5k and it didn't include insurance of any damage caused by incorrect handling. The price was 5x higher anyway.

The biggest local retailer offers similar insurance. From my understanding of their terms the insurance can be applied only when buying new equipment directly from the retailer. It can be arranged for one or two years and it cost 8x times more per year. I'm not sure how it works when you want insurance for longer time-frame.

There is still possibility that such insurance is provided by insurance company on-demand but from my experience the cost of any on-demand service will be really high. The cost of the insurance will also be affected by the participation in repair / replacement cost after accident. I can easily imagine something like 10% (or even more with small or none participation) of the equipment cost per year and that would be only insurance of the item for personal usage (no business related lose will be included).

30
Because you are using ISO 6400. Those two factors go somehow against each other. Use ISO 100 and it will work as expected. If you increased ISO to get better sensitivity use BULB to keep shutter opened longer than 30s.

Pages: 1 [2] 3