AV Janus: I think this is a good deal.The overall atmosphere in the comments suggest it is something pople can live with.Those crying never for lifetime usage need to think of a few things: - it is just one user of your photo, just he can use it,- its just one photo, how glorious do you think our work is...- 175$ for is good days pay in most o the world, plus somebody else could also buy it if its used more.- its logical usage that if they buy it they can use it in more than one of theirs catalogue or web whatever.
Control your greed.
If it's unlimited usage rights does that mean an agency could buy a picture you posted then print it as posters and sell hundreds of thousands of them while you get that one time fee? Or that they could buy your picture and use it to promote something that you disagree with strongly. Or all of a sudden your picture of your teenage daughter is being used to sell condoms all over europe
I thinkbthat these are things you would need to think about before posting pictures there.
I've just had a play - that's impressive!
Stunning shot, well worth the effort, thanks for sharing!
RumpelHund: Love the idea, Adobe will win over the community for sure. I don't see how anybody using one of those tools will find a flaw in the offer, unless it's about illegal copies of course.
Hope this pays off well enough for adobe in the long run. For me (CS4 and LR5) it's the thing I hoped for.
I'm sure that you have Photoshop 7 and a version of raw Adobe Raw Converter that works with your brand new camera right? If you're using Photoshop generally you have to upgrade when you upgrade your camera anyway.
dombi: There are two types of users.
- Professionals who use Photoshop on a daily basis (8 hours/day). - Hobby users, who use Photoshop occasionally (maybe 8 hours/week or /month).
The current pricing might be good for professional users, who make a living using Photoshop. But it is too expensive for the hobby users, who don't use PS that much.
Adobe could come up with a "pre-paid" type user fee for the hobby users. Because hobby users probably don't want to pay the same price as the professional users, since they don't even use the software as much and probably as extensively.
Lets assume that a pro user uses PS on an average about 160 hours/month (20 days * 8 hours). They currently paying 10 USD for this, which comes to about 0.0625 USD/hour.
With this, how about a pre-paid plan, where a hobby user could open an pre-paid user account with a minimum of 10 USD, and then be charged by the hours of use. The hourly rate could be double of the pro: 0.125 USD/hour.
I'd sign up for it
Hi Inars - would you buy it anyway?
Until the subscription model I didn't use Photoshop and she was using old (CS2 or earlier) versions of photoshop, dreamweaver, indesign, etc)
I jumped at the subscription model - it means that I can keep my photography software up to date and my wife can use the design tools without us having to spend big chunks of money every time there's an upgrade.
AshMills: Bear in mind that Lightroom 6 could be an additional charge...
Yes, it cost me nothing extra (over my standard CC subscription) to go from LR4 to LR5 - it's a subscription, not a rental..
From about 20 lines above your post...
"To be clear, $9.99 is not an introductory price. It is the price for those of you who sign up by December 31, 2013. This offer will be available at the same time we introduce the new version of Lightroom 5.2 in a couple weeks. Visit the FAQ to learn more and follow Photoshop on Facebook, Twitter and Google+ to find out when the offer goes live."
This is crazy - Adobe sell Lightroom separately and they sell Elements for those that want most of the functionality at a much lower cost. But for $120/year you can get full Photoshop and Lightroom and you think that Adobe are charging too much? The last time I bought Photoshop it was about £500 - even if we use a 1:1 £:$ ratio that's 4 years of use plus Lightroom.
This is soo much cheaper than antyhing that they've ever done before (and you can still buy elements and Lightroom separately if that's what you want).
Assuming that a 3db gain is a doubling then they are talking 30 stops? Really?
I felt it was marketing hyperbole when thye switched measures from stops to db
Debankur Mukherjee: Why do you require all these gimicks in Camera body when you have softwares with you including Photoshop......
Because if you're reporting on an event you don't have time to photoshop the images and get them out in real time...
snapshottomugshot: i am planning of purchasing lr4. but i cant decide yet till i figure this out.
im a new user of mac, i have a macbook pro. 10.6.8 but i don't know if im running a 64bit processor or 32 bit i have been turning over rocks to know this. can anyone help me.
It's 64bit, all Macs are now and the OS itself changed to ONLY 64bit (and broke a lot of 32bit only apps) at Snow Leopard - play away!
This still looks remarkably useable!
The rat is losing some detail and it's beginning to look a bit washed out but considering the conditions and the ISO wow!
CameraLabTester: A very welcome product!
The overpriced TS lenses of the other major brands just lost their value overnight...
No they didn't, the Nikon ones for example are very sharp, even wide open, they give you much more control over tilt (and they give you shift, which is a completely different type of movement) and they have electronic aperture control so you don't have to compose stopped down...
Try taking a landscape with the whole view in focus or architecture with straight buildings then tell us that this replaces TS lenses.
Out of curiosity - are any of the images at ISO 100?
Great work on your link, tcom
AbrasiveReducer: I'm sure this is a nice lens and a good value. 50/1.8 lenses usually are. But with all due respect--and not wanting to seem like a snob--have things in photo reached a point where the introduction of a 50mm lens is that big a deal?
It's the first cheap 50mm that Nikon have produced that will work in AF on the bodies with no motors in as mentioned in the post, some of which are 4 or maybe 5 years old now - as the 85mm is not AFS either it's going to be an introduction to shallow dof or natural (low) light portraits for a lot of people.
So in lots of ways, yes it is a big deal!