Pat Cullinan Jr: Want a name? It's Shantanu Narayen.
Make a note.
I throw mine in the sock drawer with the heap of digicams and eggshells.
We must let our senators and congressmen/women know about this.
In his YouTube video, Charles Reilly points out that the Australian government once forced Adobe to lower prices to reach parity with those charged in the US. So there's an example of government action of some kind.
It may repay the effort to apply to the Federal Trade Commission for attention to this matter -- http://ftc.gov
The Reilly video is here -- https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=s-hYc_SEDqw#!
[With thanks to Gary JP.]
Want a name? It's Shantanu Narayen.
SteveJL: WOW! and WTHF? This link
posted by Henry M. Hertz REALLY deserves a look as it truly portrays the level of Evil this move represents. NOT COOL AT ALL ADOBE. Takes everything to a hole new level.
THIS IS AN OUTRAGEOUS PROVOCATION, AN ABSURD IMPOSITION!
That does it! Till now, I was straddling the fence, BUT NOW I WASH MY HANDS OF ADOBE FOR KEEPS!
40daystogo: Eh Winston, see these two Adobe stock charts.
Don't we all love it how Adobe's stock has plummeted ever since the greed-fest was announced on 6th May.
That is one pukka website.
fmian: Perhaps dpreview should create a 'low brow' news section, and allow readers to filter out this stuff, and the article about the guy who adapted a large lens to take photos with his mft camera.
The premise of this article is a total non issue. Should we reconsider modifying images when sending them to pre-press, should a colour image never be displayed in black and white?
You have to pass high-school geometry.
CameraLabTester: Well it's a good thing they didn't remove the overhead wires in the first photo...
The energy sponsors of the program will complain...
The wire is for a Spiderman stunt. Then it's off to the shop for wire removal.
Pat Cullinan Jr: <quote>there's not a lot of photography-specific value in our subscription products.</quote>
I've been wondering for years why Adobe doesn't spall off the photography-centric functionality of PS and beef up the scion with some seriously useful photographic features.
Failing that, how about ADDING "a lot of photography-specific value"?
Under communism, the workers pretended to work and the regime pretended to pay them.
Haw haw! One respondent in 20 thinks it will work for them!
TheEye: If Adobe gets away with their scheme, every other software company will eventually follow suit.
At this point I won't buy any Adobe product just out of principle.
THAT'S HORRIBLY TRUE!!!
<quote>there's not a lot of photography-specific value in our subscription products.</quote>
Henry M. Hertz: it´s the same as with windows 8.
now look what microsoft is doing:
don´t mess with your customers!!!
So Microsoft is backing off on that abominable Metro interface. Their policy and their obstinacy have been beyond comprehension.
Don't they retain corporate psychiatrists to steer them away from debacles like this?
<quote> One final point I'd like to address is the misconception that you have to be continuously connected to the Internet to use a CC application. </quote>
Why, oh why, did they wait so long before saying this? Were they afraid of being thought patronizing or condescending?
It took them years before they revealed the enigmatic machinery of importing files into Lightroom. It was never that unfathomable in any case.
Remember Lightroom version 1? IT DIDN'T DO ANYTHING.
For other reasons requiring too much space to treat at this time, I dislike Adobe. It doesn't surprise me that almost 600 comments have exploded around this topic in such a short time.
I have CS5. For me CS6 offers almost nothing, except for the charcoal GUI, which should have been implemented 18 years ago, when I started with version 4. PSE has had a dark GUI for years. Why has PS been so long in following suit?
Yesterday I downloaded GIMP. The price is right and the developers have a good attitude.
Kevin Sutton: Excellent article but I find I tend to agree with the 1950's American publishers regarding the photos. Some of the subject matter would have been much more interesting if it was in focus and not blurred etc. Maybe I just don't understand Art...
I have an IQ of 155 and I have no trouble telling art from a hole in the roof.
NDaniel: Glad I find this article, as a beginner my self, I found that interact closely with people while doing street photography is very important, smile to them, and sometimes show the shoot to them will bring intimacy, and I just notice (oh man!!!) I have one shoot that quite similar with his shoot (Kid and his gun) although without the gun it self.... love this article
if you have time kindly visit my page at
Some of your photos are real winners, like the ones cited below. You definitely out-Klein Klein.
They're selling ABC on Amazon for 35 cents.
I hope this triggers an EVF stampede.
(A feeble OVF would satisfy me.)
dopsgp: Fujifilm, please make a fullframe X body. There is market for a better, more reliable Leica M.
Another good idea. Fujifilm, are you listening?
It's time the clacking, jolting mirror left the scene. IQ will benefit. And subjects will become pleasantly oblivious.
Tom Caldwell: Just shows that people don't mind big lenses on little cameras. Used to be a lot of fuss over the idea that if you make a small EVIL-type camera then you can only fit small lenses to it.
Yes, let's have some compact primes.
Can you use it to take pictures?