Camera Labs

Hi folks,

The writing has been on the wall for some time and not just with Adobe. It seems that in the post CS6 era the only way to access Adobe's Creative Suite will be on a subscription basis (source).

Maybe the total cost of ownership won't be too different over the years. That said, I'm not too happy about potentially being locked in to such a subscription for the rest of my life. I routinely save images as PSD files with multiple layers representing the different processing steps (particularly handy for astrophotography) and I am left wondering just how accessible those files might be at some future point when I can no longer justify an Adobe subscription. Yes, there are third party programs that can read PSDs but surely not those richly layered PSDs which rely on the Photoshop engine to render them - the day that subscription expires so does my access to those layered PSDs. So far as I can see it doesn't matter what file format one chooses: the only way, short of taking out a temporary and expensive monthly subscription, to guarantee future access to one's images without an annual Adobe subscription will be to save flattened versions.

So changing from a perpetual licence model to a subscription model might have a major drawback for the private user. And, for the future, god forbid that Adobe tries to inflict the sort of UI changes that Microsoft has done with Windows 8 but if it did then, tough! You'll have no choice but to accept the pain as your software gets automatically upgraded for you, hopefully (!) at a time of your choosing if major UI changes were ever to be introduced.

What do you think? Subscriptions, good or bad?

Bob.

_________________
OM-D E-M5 + ED 12-50mm, H-PS14042E, H-F007014E, L-RS014150E, M.ZUIKO DIGITAL 45mm 1:1.8.
Gitzo GT1541T, Arca-Swiss Z1 DP ball-head.
Astrophotography: TEC 140 'scope, FLI ML16803 camera, ASA DDM60 Pro mount.

I haven't done the full calculations, but it seems that in the scenario where you keep up to date with releases, the long term cost is in a similar ball park. If you're the type that skips a release, you will pay more.

To me, Photoshop cost was a bit too much to swallow as an individual. As such, I made do with the crippled Photoshop Elements. It doesn't do everything I want, but it does do say 80% and I have workarounds available for other areas. Assuming I go "single application" then there isn't any long term saving other than getting access in instalments as opposed to up front lump sum. I wonder if that could tempt some over? Not me though.

It would be an interesting test to see if there are PSD files that PSE wont open. The only drawback I can see of PSE is that it has extremely limited support for editing functions on files of greater than 8 bits per channel.

It may be worth revisiting Paint Shop Pro. I'm still on the ancient version 7 (copyrighted 2000!), and they're on X5 now. Maybe I'm overdue seeing what they've put in since then?

_________________
Canon DSLRs: 7D, 5D2, 1D, 600D, 450D full spectrum, 300D IR mod
Lenses: EF 35/2, 50/1.8, 85/1.8, 135/2+SF, 28-80 V, 70-300L, 100-400L, TS-E 24/3.5L, MP-E 65, EF-S 15-85 IS
3rd party: Zeiss 2/50 makro, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300 f/2.8 OS, Celestron 1325/13
Tinies: Sony HX9V.

I assume the current versions won't be affected. If so, the solution is easy - don't upgrade! Probably 90% of the stuff on Photoshop is not used by 90% of its users.

I'm using an old version of Lightroom and it still does far more than I ever need.

_________________
http://www.flickr.com/photos/53061745@N02/

Panasonic G3: 9-18mm, 14mm, 20mm, 45mm

.
I've played the "don't upgrade" game regularly. In fact I always used to skip every other PS release. It does mean that one can't use the built-in raw converter once one buys a camera released after PS has released the next version unless one uses the DNG converter which isn't too convenient. But one can only play that game for so long as Adobe, to give it credit, does introduce genuinely useful new functionality over the years.

Personally I don't like the idea of renting software as there is no easy exit strategy (c.f. my point about layered PSD files in my previous post) but there's little to be done. I doubt the lawmakers can prevent the move even given that Adobe does have an effective monopoly at this end of the photo-editing market. But Adobe isn't doing this for my benefit - they are protecting their future revenue stream and if they have more money then that effectively means that their cutomers, taken as a whole, have less.

Bob.

_________________
OM-D E-M5 + ED 12-50mm, H-PS14042E, H-F007014E, L-RS014150E, M.ZUIKO DIGITAL 45mm 1:1.8.
Gitzo GT1541T, Arca-Swiss Z1 DP ball-head.
Astrophotography: TEC 140 'scope, FLI ML16803 camera, ASA DDM60 Pro mount.

Adobe as a company is very much aimed at the business and professional end, where pockets are much deeper than enthusiasts. They don't care about lost sales of the latter providing they can keep a steady income from the former.

I still haven't forgiven Adobe for buying out Syntrillium, who made the wonderful sound editor Cool Edit. They had a few versions, but when Adobe took over the consumer versions were killed and you can now only get the Pro version at huge cost. At least in the Photoshop series they throw out the cut down Elements for the masses.

_________________
Canon DSLRs: 7D, 5D2, 1D, 600D, 450D full spectrum, 300D IR mod
Lenses: EF 35/2, 50/1.8, 85/1.8, 135/2+SF, 28-80 V, 70-300L, 100-400L, TS-E 24/3.5L, MP-E 65, EF-S 15-85 IS
3rd party: Zeiss 2/50 makro, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300 f/2.8 OS, Celestron 1325/13
Tinies: Sony HX9V.

There is a rapidly growing backlash against Adobe's decision. I think many people will just stay with their most-recently bought versions and avoid the subscription to thee cloud service until an alternative arrives.

This has opened up an opportunity for big developers to step in and mop up what will become a growing pent-up demand for a PS-esque non-subscription photo editing software.

_________________
http://www.flickr.com/photos/53061745@N02/

Panasonic G3: 9-18mm, 14mm, 20mm, 45mm

Hi folks,

The more I think about it the more I consider the "locked in for life" issue to be the killer. Over at DPR there's an interesting Q&A with Bryan O'Neill Hughes, Senior Product Manager for Photoshop. I'll forgive his slightly dismissive opening swipe at the "hobbyist photographic community" but when asked "What happens to Photoshop CC and my files if I cancel my subscription?" he goes on to say:


How reassuring - NOT. The "files you've created and saved on your hard drive are left intact" but, unless they are flattened, you probably won't be able to access the images they contain unless you have a valid subscription.

Actually, Adobe could solve this problem incredibly simply by providing a subscription free build of Photoshop (latest cloud version) limited to reading, rendering and saving PSD files in a more universal, but flattened, format. If that ability were extended to not only flattened versions of the PSD but also image layers then I'd be comfortable. No editing would be possible but that's perfectly fair if my subscription lapses. But I retain perpetual access to my images and, with the layers visible, I can even see how most of the adjustments were made. Yes, I could achieve the same result by making sure the images, and layered component images, were saved separately as flattened TIFFs but should that really be necessary?

So, c'mon @Adobe. Move us to the cloud and the benefits that enables by all means but provide a free "reader" which can allow us to retrieve and save our image data should a subscription lapse.

Bob.

_________________
OM-D E-M5 + ED 12-50mm, H-PS14042E, H-F007014E, L-RS014150E, M.ZUIKO DIGITAL 45mm 1:1.8.
Gitzo GT1541T, Arca-Swiss Z1 DP ball-head.
Astrophotography: TEC 140 'scope, FLI ML16803 camera, ASA DDM60 Pro mount.

I'm not sure a "reader" version is really necessary. 3rd party support of psd seems to be fine for the moment, although I probably don't push the format hard enough to see if there are cracks in implementations for more heavy users. That's not to say something couldn't be broken in future updates, but if you're not keeping on the leading edge then you're less likely to run into that problem.

Anyway, to scope out the size of the issue, why not try opening psd files in other software and see how far you get? Even putting aside editing software, in a quick search of the interwebs, there doesn't seem to be any shortage of file converters.

_________________
Canon DSLRs: 7D, 5D2, 1D, 600D, 450D full spectrum, 300D IR mod
Lenses: EF 35/2, 50/1.8, 85/1.8, 135/2+SF, 28-80 V, 70-300L, 100-400L, TS-E 24/3.5L, MP-E 65, EF-S 15-85 IS
3rd party: Zeiss 2/50 makro, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300 f/2.8 OS, Celestron 1325/13
Tinies: Sony HX9V.

Hi popo,

Sorry, but I think you are wrong. Layers are an integral part of the way Photoshop works and there's an argument that if you don't use layers then maybe you don't need Photoshop. Those layers might contain images but the power lies in adjustment layers which intimately rely on the Photoshop engine to work their magic. I just don't see any way that a third party PSD reader could accurately retain the look of an image even if it the PSD were readable.

Fortunately, and selfishly, my personal solution is easy. I have CS6 and don't need to take advantage of Adobe's Creative Cloud introductory pricing unless Adobe addresses my concerns. Adobe have stated that they will update CS6 to be compatible with the next major Mac and Windows releases, should that be necessary, and that they will also, in a break with previous policy, update it with the next major release of ACR, Camera Raw 8. As my CS6 licence is "perpetual" I don't have to change the way I work at the moment. There is no other software on the planet which allows me to do what I do in Photoshop so Adobe has me and many others over a barrel with this change, even if that barrel doesn't become a "must have" for five or even ten years. I'd just like them to be aware of the fact and maybe add a few comfy cushions to make that barrel a little more, er, comfy. Make it comfy enough and they might even have me subscribing as early as this year rather than, say, in 2020.

Bob.

_________________
OM-D E-M5 + ED 12-50mm, H-PS14042E, H-F007014E, L-RS014150E, M.ZUIKO DIGITAL 45mm 1:1.8.
Gitzo GT1541T, Arca-Swiss Z1 DP ball-head.
Astrophotography: TEC 140 'scope, FLI ML16803 camera, ASA DDM60 Pro mount.

To me layers are one part of PS, but far from a killer feature. From my perspective, having access to the basic data is key. How you fiddle with it is secondary. Fair enough, if you need the Adobe look then you would probably end up sticking to PS. But I do think 3rd party support isn't that bad.

_________________
Canon DSLRs: 7D, 5D2, 1D, 600D, 450D full spectrum, 300D IR mod
Lenses: EF 35/2, 50/1.8, 85/1.8, 135/2+SF, 28-80 V, 70-300L, 100-400L, TS-E 24/3.5L, MP-E 65, EF-S 15-85 IS
3rd party: Zeiss 2/50 makro, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300 f/2.8 OS, Celestron 1325/13
Tinies: Sony HX9V.

Hi folks,

A fairly muted response to Adobe's decision to move to a "rental only" distribution model for future versions of Photoshop so I've added a poll to try and see why.

Bob.

_________________
OM-D E-M5 + ED 12-50mm, H-PS14042E, H-F007014E, L-RS014150E, M.ZUIKO DIGITAL 45mm 1:1.8.
Gitzo GT1541T, Arca-Swiss Z1 DP ball-head.
Astrophotography: TEC 140 'scope, FLI ML16803 camera, ASA DDM60 Pro mount.

Question for any Mac users out there: is there a Final Cut Pro for stills? i.e. a non-Adobe alternative to Photoshop like Final Cut Pro is to Premiere.

Thanks - Mark

Hi folks,

An interesting response to the poll. So far I'm the only one who won't be actively looking for a Photoshop alternative, despite my gruntlement being extremely dissed!

I've just wasted abut an hour chatting with an Adobe technical support guy online. If he is typical then Adobe doesn't seem capable of even understanding the problem they are creating let alone realising a solution to it. No Adobe cloud for me - wish I'd voted for the last option now! Aargh!

Update: I changed my vote!

Bob.

_________________
OM-D E-M5 + ED 12-50mm, H-PS14042E, H-F007014E, L-RS014150E, M.ZUIKO DIGITAL 45mm 1:1.8.
Gitzo GT1541T, Arca-Swiss Z1 DP ball-head.
Astrophotography: TEC 140 'scope, FLI ML16803 camera, ASA DDM60 Pro mount.

No quite as many features as Photoshop but Apple have Aperture http://www.apple.com/aperture/

For me the issue with the cloud model for software is what happens with legacy systems and restores? If you have the original discs this is no problem but how long will Adobe keep older versions of software live for download? Maybe you like the features of a previous version of software how do you revert to the old version?

Can you download an installer and burn it to CD/DVD to install as and when or will they go down the Quark route and have some convoluted registration process. You would think the way In Design stole a march on Quark would tell Adobe not to go there.

_________________
Nikon D90
Nikkor AF-S DX; 18-105 f/3.5-5.6G VR, 55-300 f/4.5-5.6G VR, 35mm f/1.8G
Speedlight SB-700

http://keystrokesukimages.com

Keystroke, if my understanding of what Adobe is doing is correct, there is no legacy software to worry about. As long as you keep paying the sub, you get the current version. So it is all or nothing.

Even the current stand alone software still requires activation servers, so there may come a day when you can't transfer licences between computers any more. But having said that, they may do a "CS2" and offer unlocked versions for licensed users to use.

_________________
Canon DSLRs: 7D, 5D2, 1D, 600D, 450D full spectrum, 300D IR mod
Lenses: EF 35/2, 50/1.8, 85/1.8, 135/2+SF, 28-80 V, 70-300L, 100-400L, TS-E 24/3.5L, MP-E 65, EF-S 15-85 IS
3rd party: Zeiss 2/50 makro, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300 f/2.8 OS, Celestron 1325/13
Tinies: Sony HX9V.