12 hours ago
 |
Stu 5
Lives in
United Kingdom
Works as a
Photographer
Joined on
Apr 11, 2005
|
   |
|
Connect with dpreview
|
40daystogo: An Australian newspaper's report on Adobe CC. The conclusion: "As an amateur photographer, are you ready to sign up for a year's subscription at $600 to use Photoshop? We thought not."
http://www.theage.com.au/digital-life/cameras/monopoly-money-20130522-2jzmi.html
The only thing is the article is wrong. The cost for Photoshop on it's own is $240 AU a year, ex GST. $600 is for the full package of all their software for photography, video editing and website construction etc.
https://store1.adobe.com/cfusion/store/html/index.cfm?store=OLS-AU&event=displayProduct&categoryPath=/Applications/Photoshop
madeinlisboa: Dpreview do you have something against Nikon's brilliant tool CaptureNX?
GaryJP so you now think CC will be a success and so much a success that Adobe will want to increase the premiums by 200% to reduce their client base so it does not put such a strain on their servers. Interesting...
madeinlisboa: Dpreview do you have something against Nikon's brilliant tool CaptureNX?
madeinlisboa adding Raw support is another thing. The program as many are aware is developed by Nik for Nikon. There has been no news yet on it's future development.
Actually you might want to read this:
http://nikonrumors.com/2013/04/03/google-will-not-support-capture-nx.aspx/
madeinlisboa: Dpreview do you have something against Nikon's brilliant tool CaptureNX?
Just a Photographer try reading my comment again as you are clearly missing my point, which is this... You said the accountant told you:
'In the end you will pay more and get less from Adobe.
The only one that gets better from this construction is Adobe...'
Or was that your comment? If it was it is not clear from your wording.
Also how it is other American based photographers are able to claim the full amount as a business expense and have been since the renting option came out?
sebastian huvenaars: I'm pretty confident Adobe is getting the underlaying message in this article.
Cudos to DPR for making such a statement :)
CyberAngel just because a lot of people do not see moving to Creative Cloud as a negative does not make them trolls. If just means they have a different opinion to yours which they are entitled to.
sebastian huvenaars: I'm pretty confident Adobe is getting the underlaying message in this article.
Cudos to DPR for making such a statement :)
Yet the share price is still up from the beginning of the year and and even higher than last year.
madeinlisboa: Dpreview do you have something against Nikon's brilliant tool CaptureNX?
Just a Photographer how would an accountant know what you get from Adobe? After all he is an accountant not a photographer or does your accountant do both? If he is not a photographer he will not be able to comment on the material worth of any product as he does not know about it. So he will not know if someone will 'get less from Adobe' or for that matter more.
madeinlisboa: Dpreview do you have something against Nikon's brilliant tool CaptureNX?
Alternative Energy Photography not everyone lives in America. Also already read about some American photographers claiming it all back without a problem, saying it is easier to claim it all back than compared to where they can not always claim the whole cost of the upgrade back.
lds2k: What about Capture NX2 as an editing tool?
It is not only for Nikon cameras HowaboutRAW, it can edit Tiff and Jpeg as well. There is quite a few non Nikon people that use it, the same as quite a lot of non Raw users use Lightroom or Aperture.
LouMeluso: The title of this tome is an immediate turn off to me. I'm not sure why the authors felt use of a pseudo-sanitized vulgarity in the title was appropriate but it is lost on me and marginalizes whatever good content that may lie within.
Anepo it does not say that at all. It's is quite a common term throughout the photography and TV/film industry.
sebastian huvenaars: I'm pretty confident Adobe is getting the underlaying message in this article.
Cudos to DPR for making such a statement :)
Just a Photographer, my business model, what are you going on about?
madeinlisboa: Dpreview do you have something against Nikon's brilliant tool CaptureNX?
If you are a pro photographer Just a Photographer you might want to talk to your accountant as they will explain how it works.
sebastian huvenaars: I'm pretty confident Adobe is getting the underlaying message in this article.
Cudos to DPR for making such a statement :)
Just a Photographer with anything like this you will get a lot of angry people that say they will do this or that. A lot of the time an awful lot don't follow through. On top of that you have all the ones who say they are angry but then you discover they don't even use the software in the first place. Then you have the ones who are angry leave a comment of Adobe's Facebook page and then a day later post that they illegally downloaded the software anyway and have never paid for it. (There has been a few of those) Then you have the ones that discover when they investigate the competition it won't do all the things they need anyway. In the end of that you have the ones who remain that do actually switch to something else. That number will always be a lot lower than the original number who were not happy.
Where are all those angry posters that were on the original two threads because they are not on here discussing their options? Something like an 80% drop off already.
madeinlisboa: Dpreview do you have something against Nikon's brilliant tool CaptureNX?
Just a Photographer CaptureNX future is uncertain compared to Adobe or any other photo software for the simple reason it's manufacturer has been sold to Google. Google nor Nikon have given any news what is happening with it.
As far as monthly cost go it is very simple, if Adobe increase the prices a lot as soon as people get to the end of their 12 month subscriptions they will go elsewhere so that is a good enough reason for Adobe to be careful with any price increase. If your a pro photographer you will claim it back in full as a business expense anyway so it is not costing you anyway.
sebastian huvenaars: I'm pretty confident Adobe is getting the underlaying message in this article.
Cudos to DPR for making such a statement :)
With so few comments it could also be read that the majority of people are fine.
madeinlisboa: Dpreview do you have something against Nikon's brilliant tool CaptureNX?
Most people would not be that aware it can be used for other cameras. The future for this program is currently uncertain though.
Klindar: Adobe's decision may very well provide competitors with the business they need to develop their products into complete/superior alternatives. For many years I used JASC (now Corel) Paintshop and switched to CS a few years ago only because I needed support for 48 bit images. Corel then announced support for 48/16 bit and I was happy being able to go back to Paintshop a couple of years ago. For me, it is the technically superior product with a similar (but better) interface to Photoshop, accepts the same plugins and is 10% the cost. The scripting is more flexible and easier to do than Photoshop "Actions". A single license lets you install to 3 machines ... my main unit, backup and portable. I'd have to buy 2 licenses from Adobe to use Photoshop that way. I realize you can transfer a Photoshop license but it's a nuisance. Unfortunately, no Paintshop Apple version but the way Corel has ramped up support and been promoting Paintshop suggests that may come.
@By Josh152 that is not what he said. Thom Hogan said on his blog:
A number of folk have questioned my workflow. I always save and rename raw files into a file structure heirarchy first. Then and only then do I import into Lightroom or Aperture. Why? Because I can find any file in my structure without relying upon a software product with a proprietary database that some day may no longer make it through a tech transition.
So basically what he is saying is he is using Lightroom but he knows how to find each file outside of Lightroom.
That is actually only common sense. It is quite simple. Import a shoot into a folder for that shoot. Then open up Lightoom and import the images without moving them. It is a good idea to get Lightoom to save .xmp files back into the same folder. That way you can open the Raws up with another Adobe product and see the changes or open the Raws in another brand of software and start from fresh with changes.
Photomonkey: Photoline is an interesting alternative.
Comes from Germany and is priced at 59 euros.
Seems to have a lot of features, is 64 bit and has RAW support.
As the UI is different it will take a bit of time to see if it measures up.
Toermalijn Photo Ninja is far from the best. It lacks a huge amount of features found in ACR and Lightroom.
Photomonkey: Photoline is an interesting alternative.
Comes from Germany and is priced at 59 euros.
Seems to have a lot of features, is 64 bit and has RAW support.
As the UI is different it will take a bit of time to see if it measures up.
plevyadophy if you have made adjustments to the Raw files in another brand of Raw converter for example Lightroom or Aperture etc etc and then export the file as a .dng Photoline will not recognise any of those adjustments at all. You would need to do the Raw conversion in the other program and then export the file as a Tiff or PSD file and open those up in Photoline.
vickylou: So which is the closest alternative to photoshop?
Adding Elements+ for $12 brings a lot of those features back though:
http://elementsplus.net
You will see a list on their website of all the features it adds and the list is long and for $12 cheap.
Adding the Elemental plugin for Lightroom which is donation software gives you similar integration with Ps Elements to what you would get with full Ps.
http://thephotogeek.com/lightroom/elemental/
You won't get 16 bit editing with all the features in Ps E but in the expert mode with these two plugins you get a lot more control.