Previous news story    Next news story

Adobe releases subscription-only Photoshop CC

By dpreview staff on Jun 18, 2013 at 13:02 GMT

Adobe has released the latest version of Photoshop: CC for 'Creative Cloud'. It's the first to be made available solely though the company's controversial subscription-only model, that requires users to pay an ongoing monthly charge of £17.58 / $19.99 for access to the software (as opposed to a one-off license fee). New features include a revised 'Smart Sharpen' function, a 'Camera Shake Reduction' filter, and the ability to apply Camera Raw edits as layers. The latest versions of other Creative Cloud apps such the video editor Premiere Pro are also now available to download.

Note that despite its name, Photoshop CC is not really cloud-based software. It's downloaded and installed locally on your computer, and all your files can be saved locally too. What it does offer is cloud-based storage for your files, so you can access them on multiple devices while on the move. And while many users have genuine concerns over the subscription model - and crucially the fact that the software will stop working if you don't pay your monthly subscription- the relatively low monthly fee does make Photoshop rather more accessible to new users on a budget.

Comments

Total comments: 408
123
Per Inge Oestmoen
By Per Inge Oestmoen (5 months ago)

Why would I subscribe to software?

There is a fundamental difference here between two software paradigms:

- The Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) model, where the user has to pay a rent for access to the software and its functions. In this model, the user does not control his or licensed software. The user is forever dependent on the availability and accessibility of the subscription service in order to work with his or her own data - be it pictures or anything else. As soon as the subscription service is unavailable, discontinues or the user fails to pay, all use of the software is gone.

- The user-controlled model. The user pays for a perpetual license if the software is commercial, or gets it for free if the software is free. The user acquires an installable and copyable version of the software, which can then be installed at any time and an unlimited number of times on compatible hardware if the user changes hard drive or computer.

Per Inge Oestmoen, Norway

0 upvotes
PG
By PG (9 months ago)

I buy my automobiles, I never lease them, and I'm not going to lease a software license. I'm not going to let someone hold the software I use ransom for monthly cash collections. Someone must be taking drugs to think anyone wants to go along with this mob mentality. If I purchase a license I can upgrade or not when I decide, not the company, that there is some feature that is worth my additional cash outlay. With the subscription model you have no say, you either pay the monthly ransom or loose all functionality of the software, not just loss of the ability to upgrade and or get new features...and once they have you down that path they can raise the monthly ransom as much as they want and you either pay or loose the functionality of your software. I have been skipping every other upgrade since CS3 and was looking forward to CS7 but have now upgraded to CS6..this will most likely be the last Adobe product I ever expend money on unless they abolish this software hostage model.

1 upvote
Andrew Symonds
By Andrew Symonds (9 months ago)

The main reason for adobe to release the PS CC from my perspective is to stop piracy, as it is an essential amendment for their economic survival. Although the cloud-storage feature is pretty impressive, it will help only those Creative Media minds that are always on-the-go.

0 upvotes
simmybear31
By simmybear31 (9 months ago)

Stopping piracy does not increase sales by 1$ because casual user "pirates" would never buy the software before and wont now.

0 upvotes
Michel J
By Michel J (9 months ago)

Do this software is targeted for piracy? If so, why?
The R&D cost of the core of them softwares has long been amortized. Adobe is not to fighting piracy, but to build an annuity of situation. Period.

0 upvotes
Nerolance1967
By Nerolance1967 (9 months ago)

My 2cents.
I'm a professional retoucher/graphic artist. Most used Adobe software are PS, Ai, Br, Id and LR.

Started in prepress industry and now working in a photo studio.

I am a CC member and pay about $30-a-month to have access to every software Adobe has to offer.
It was a special for signing up for a year. Hope they don't bump the price too much after the year ends.
Can't bitch too much. CC $30 a month, $360 a year.
Make 60k to 70k a year because to CC.
Even doubling it to $720 a year, do the math. Its still not bad.

For all you hobbyist I wouldn't recommend CC, you don't need it. Whatever version of PS you have should be fine.
Don't worry too much about compatibly since you are most likely only working on files processes by your version of PS.

For all you professionals, photographer, graphic designers, retouchers, ect…………..
While I don't like anything getting more expensive, think about the money you make because of CS/CC.

0 upvotes
Michel J
By Michel J (9 months ago)

If so: can you remembering to us in which dpt of Adoibe you still working? I had some questions. Thanks.

0 upvotes
Toermalijn
By Toermalijn (10 months ago)

It seems Adobe is allready lying again to us.

I recently upgraded to creative suite 6 because they would end the posibility to upgrade mid of june, according to their E-mail.

So i upgraded and i tried out on their site if i still could order CS6. It is still possible to perchase cs6, despite their statement that sales for the upgrade would close mid june!!!

It seems Adobe tries to milk the cs6 cow also as much as possible.

2 upvotes
CarlosNunezUSA
By CarlosNunezUSA (10 months ago)

...and so it begins, instead of working on real features, they throw a few lousy minimal "revisions" to the people subscribed in order to justify the $$$$ they are spending every month on... nothing. Sweet deal for Adobe, crappy one for the addicts who subscribe to that garbage.

5 upvotes
mewickham
By mewickham (10 months ago)

Instead of changing the name from CS to CC, they should have changed it to FU.

It looks like CS6 is my last version of Photoshop (and other applications in the CS Designer series). I will NEVER rent software. I can't believe Adobe is asking us to pay $600 per year FOREVER, just to have access to new features. I would like access to the new Camera Shake Reduction feature. But I will not pay $600 PER YEAR FOR LIFE, just to have continued access to that one new feature. If necessary, I'll keep an old computer running, just to keep my CS6 running for the rest of my career. No sweat.

Bring back the upgrade path. I used to love Adobe. Now I HATE them. I have bought every Photoshop version since PS6, and every CS version of the designer suite. But Adobe will get no more of my money. We'll both be sorry about that.

3 upvotes
Sordid
By Sordid (10 months ago)

If you bought every version since PS6 - how much did you pay in total? How much would you have paid had a subscription model already existed back then?

0 upvotes
RangerRickMN
By RangerRickMN (10 months ago)

Very disappointing that Adobe is choosing a cloud only pricing model. In response, our photo club will be spending time to educate and train our members on alternative software options to Adobe.

Give feedback to Adobe with where you spend your money$$$

Disappointed customer

5 upvotes
Helle
By Helle (10 months ago)

I am also very annoyed with this new step - wondering if people from Adobe are reading this? (one could hope)

4 upvotes
Adam L Productions
By Adam L Productions (10 months ago)

Never again, Adobe. Finding other editing suites to work with. Enjoy the huge reduction in customers due to poor short-sighted decisions on your part.

5 upvotes
spitfire31
By spitfire31 (10 months ago)

I suggest that a mod ban this character calling himself 'tell the truth' and purge the thread of his posts. His infantile drivel is hurting this discussion, causing it to lose any pretensions of being taken seriously.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
5 upvotes
makistza
By makistza (10 months ago)

TO ADOBE : if you saw 65% lost of your profit then the solution is simple.

1. drop the cc thing.
2. ask for forgiveness public from the global community (SONY did it in the recent past) .
3. change the cc name to CS7
4. fire the employees who are behind the cc fiasco.
4. change the price of Photoshop from 800$ to 200$ .

Do you know how many new customers will buy from you then?

1. You will have way more than four times the customers you have now.
2. You become a software hero.
3. Everyone will respect ADOBE because you will approve
that big companies actually HEAR the global community. AND CARE.

I really don't understand ADOBE ...
Don't you want to make money?
Don't you want to have faithful and happy customers?

This is simply logic , its not rocket science....

6 upvotes
artlmntl
By artlmntl (10 months ago)

Not to put too fine a point on it, but their stock trends indicate that Adobe is doing just fine with their new plan.

The CC is intended as an initiative to level cash flow between software releases and to produce ever-increasing profit. Whether that will actually happen long-term is difficult to say. But at present, it appears Adobe is rolling merrily along compared to this time last year.

0 upvotes
Reg Natarajan
By Reg Natarajan (10 months ago)

To the loud people screaming about how Adobe sucks, you're doing your side no favours. You might want to tone it down a bit if you hope to be taken seriously.

3 upvotes
Sordid
By Sordid (10 months ago)

ttt, nobody believes you have any sort of students.
Both your spelling and your behavior show that you're an angry kid who's upset that Photoshop will be cracked a day later than usual now.

1 upvote
frank200
By frank200 (10 months ago)

If we say yes to adobe now, we will be saying yes to all other software companies starting with all your plug-ins!!! so think better before signing for the CC !

Comment edited 30 seconds after posting
6 upvotes
micahmedia
By micahmedia (10 months ago)

Unlike other markets--video games, operating systems, microprocessors--Adobe software has long been unrivaled in it's market. Apparently, they didn't like the distinction of having a monopoly on a much beloved software.

They obviously decided to do what they think is best for us and have thrown themselves off a cliff.

1 upvote
oneroundone
By oneroundone (10 months ago)

Kind of sad.
After many, many years only to be forced, because of Adobe's greed, to move to a different software.
I guess I will look at it as an exciting new adventure with a NEW software package.

9 upvotes
Drew Loker
By Drew Loker (10 months ago)

I am opposed to Adobe CC as well. As a public school teacher, Adobe is making it VERY difficult to keep my class current. I am very grateful that my classroom was just updated to CS6 in Spring of 2012, and this should last reasonably well for another couple of years. I can only hope that Adobe DRAMATICALLY adjusts it's pricing and/or system. All I know is that looking at the Education Plan right now would cost THOUSANDS more than it currently costs. On a person note, I can not imagine what Adobe is thinking. I certainly will not be paying monthly for Adobe services. Even as a teacher, at $20 a month, they have forced me to look elsewhere also. I hope the competition really rises to the challenge!!!

5 upvotes
razadaz
By razadaz (10 months ago)

I wouldn't hold your breath waiting for Adobe to lower prices. I remember teaching years ago when Quark was king of the heap. The college got very little discount on the application because Quark knew fine well that we had to teach Quark Xpress as that was what employers at that time wanted employees to be qualified in.

0 upvotes
micahmedia
By micahmedia (10 months ago)

...and where's Quark these days?

2 upvotes
Just a Photographer
By Just a Photographer (10 months ago)

Quark will be back soon Micahmedia.

Indesign could only kill Quark because of the integration with the other Adobe Applications. Now there is no incentive to stay with Adobe because of its too high costs in the long term.

2 upvotes
razadaz
By razadaz (10 months ago)

Less about integration and more about bundled apps. If you bought a design suite then in came with it. Still a lot of Quark being used despite what people think.

1 upvote
Toermalijn
By Toermalijn (10 months ago)

There it begins Adobe, instead of new designers teaching Adobe products they start using the competition.

0 upvotes
Toermalijn
By Toermalijn (10 months ago)

@ razadaz

Quark is still being used because some people had a huge client base of quark files. So they need to update in order to be able to serve those people. Majority is using indesign for a good reason.

Speaking of Quark and Adobe, there is a striking resemblance now...Both are very arrogant and never listen to the faithful users.

0 upvotes
razadaz
By razadaz (10 months ago)

Having downloaded Photoshop CC, I can honestly say that even if this was available as a CS7 upgrade I would be seriously underwhelmed by it. If I was upgrading it would only be to safeguard my upgrade privileges. As it is I no longer have to worry about that (relief). If this is the best Adobe can come up with after over a years development by their brightest and best then I am not surprised they are moving to a subscription model with such haste.

8 upvotes
Just a Photographer
By Just a Photographer (10 months ago)

The only reason for Adobe to go went for the subscription model is because they can't innovate anymore. Adobe's Creative Suite was already a very mature product.

That said they could have went for a different way where you would have to pay for CameraRaw updates. PS CS6 is probably sufficient for 95% of all the people out there for the coming 5 years or so.

5 upvotes
Toermalijn
By Toermalijn (10 months ago)

It will for me, i just upgraded to cs6 design extended. No cloud for me. And i am sure this goes for a lot of people who recently upgraded. I ws and i am very underwhelmed by the new features of CC.

0 upvotes
intensity studios
By intensity studios (10 months ago)

DEATH TO CREATIVE CLOUD!!!

9 upvotes
Rational
By Rational (10 months ago)

As a matter of principle, I have no intention of sharing my photos over the Internet with Adobe or anyone else, no matter what the price.

Sooo, all of the sudden, impure thoughts come to mind, such as visits to places where copyright violations are the coin of the realm. Not that I would do it, of course, nor that I am advocating it -perish the thought...

4 upvotes
Create Dont Imitate
By Create Dont Imitate (10 months ago)

I refuse the "shake down". I refuse to be taken hostage and I refuse to deal with hostage takers.

After 15 years... I'm done with Adobe.

15 upvotes
Reg Natarajan
By Reg Natarajan (10 months ago)

An honest question for those of you upset with this: why not just use another product? There are plenty of imaging editors out there that will read your Photoshop files. Some of them are free and open source. Some are free and web based, although those tend not to be as powerful.

As I see it, Photoshop, like any premium product, has the right to charge what it likes, how it likes. The consumer has the right to accept or reject their value proposition. I accept it, myself, and actually prefer it, but you all have choices. Why not just choose instead of going on about how awful it all is?

http://www.gimp.org/
http://www.corel.com/corel/product/index.jsp?pid=prod4900069
http://pixlr.com/editor/
http://www.sumopaint.com/app/

6 upvotes
razadaz
By razadaz (10 months ago)

The problem is many of us have spent years getting to know photoshop inside out. I used to teach students how to use it at the local college, even that (basic) course took a year to complete. I would always say to people if you are going to learn image manipulation learn the industry standard.

I work fast, and photoshop is the only app that can work at that speed. I also know the program well enough to work better and quicker with an older version than most people could work with the latest version. The problem is that the future is unclear now (“cloudy” lol) and as microsoft and apple force newer versions of their operating systems on you each time you buy a new computer the compatibility issues raise their heads.

The prospect of sooner or later being forced into the cloud becomes a cause for concern.

4 upvotes
micahmedia
By micahmedia (10 months ago)

To the OP I say: why don't you just drive on the other side of the road or change your dominant hand?

There are things that are possible to do, that are still not easy or wise to do. Adobe is banking on this difficulty. It's coercive. And so far, it seems the market is not responding well.

2 upvotes
krmuir
By krmuir (10 months ago)

Installed the trial version of photoshop CC as I was interested to know whether camera shake reduction could help salvage a few important photos that had a little too much shake. Sadly I didn't find it very helpful and therefore will be sticking with CS5 - the software I own

3 upvotes
Octane
By Octane (10 months ago)

It's not 'cloud based'. In fact it has nothing to do with cloud storage or cloud based computing. Adobe just calls it that way for marketing reasons as it's a cool term right now.
What it really is, that you don't get a copy of your software, instead you have to buy a subscription plan to be able to use their software. They increased the price significantly (after the initial discount) and they give you no option to choose if you want to pay for a certain update or not. To use the software you will have to continue to pay from now on until the end of the days. You don't have the option to say, OK I'm happy now I will continue with what I have for the next 2 or 3 years.

All this talk about 'cloud' is nonsense, because that's not at all what Adobe is offering. It's a forced subscription plan that is very one sides and not to the end user's advantage.

9 upvotes
Reg Natarajan
By Reg Natarajan (10 months ago)

This is incorrect. You do get cloud storage with your subscription, and can save your files directly to it. It isn't cloud computing, but cloud storage is definitely part of the package. You can even sync your Adobe cloud storage with your local storage, similar to Dropbox.

0 upvotes
Octane
By Octane (10 months ago)

Reg, I was talking about Photoshop, the software. No one cares about added on cloud storage. I have plenty of (mostly free) cloud storage with Skydrive, Dropbox, Sugarsync, box.net, google, Amazon, Flickr. The issue is the subscription only plan.

2 upvotes
razadaz
By razadaz (10 months ago)

I hate the cloud based concept. I will not be using it, but I do accept it is probably the way things will be in the future. What I want is for customers to have the choice. The advantage of fully cloud based editing (what Adobe is implementing at this moment is not there yet) is that high power editing can be achieved on low power machines.

Even those who continue to use their present software will not fail to see the advantage of editing and processing files when working “in the field” using something like an ipad. The ability to be working in another country, being able to upload and edit files for your client agency in London to view and approve using a device that fits in the back of your camera bag.

Those not familiar with the idea of cloud based software can get a feel for by using the online free editor at http://pixlr.com/editor/

2 upvotes
intensity studios
By intensity studios (10 months ago)

Things will only be that way in the future if we, the users, put up with Adobe's abuse.

3 upvotes
Toermalijn
By Toermalijn (10 months ago)

Or Microsoft or other software companies thinking of letting us rent their software.

1 upvote
jlehet
By jlehet (10 months ago)

As I've posted, I'm going to spend the money I'd normally spend on CS7 (and not for Creative Cloud now) on other stuff. First off: Nik Collection -- which is great! But I find I have to hunt around the internet for instruction. Lynda.com has some useful video.

Question: workflow. It seems clear after a day with it that the best possible workflow for these plugins is as a smart filter in a photoshop Smart Object. However, I'm trying to keep my workflow from being locked into proprietary Adobe formats, for reasons that will be obvious to many who post here.

My solution for now is to work with the smart object/smart filter, but also save it as a flattened tif.

Any Nik users? Workflow advice? Other advice for keeping a flexible workflow but not being locked into proprietary formats?

1 upvote
madeinlisboa
By madeinlisboa (10 months ago)

CaptureNX if you have a Nikon. I still use it for 99% of my work.

1 upvote
pansycan
By pansycan (10 months ago)

Hello jlehet,
On Nik's home page go to learn>On Demand Videos. There are many many previous webinars posted there.

Sadly it seems Google has stopped the new live webinars and the Nik Radio podcast as far as I can tell.

As far as the workflow, I think the additional flattened tiff is a good idea. If your layers are important maybe you could save a PSD without smart objects as well. I know that On One has layers and saves as psd. I understand there are others that read PSD as well. I'm guessing they might hose up on a file with smart object in it though. shrug

0 upvotes
Toermalijn
By Toermalijn (10 months ago)

Unfortunately, capture nx is dead. NIK was purchased by Google so say goodbye to a new version. Luckely the NIK suite is still available as a photoshop plug-in.

0 upvotes
Biosphere
By Biosphere (10 months ago)

To those who say protesting doesn't work and the cloud is the future, have a look at this attempted parallel move from Microsoft and the backtracking

http://www.wired.com/gamelife/2013/06/xbox-one-drm/

In addition to requiring daily authentication, it effectively tied a disc to a single console so games could not be shared freely amongst friends, resold privately, etc. Complete rethink.

As for the notion that it's just a few DPR users complaining about this, Adobe's Q2 earnings call reported sales down 10% and profit down 65%, so it's going to be very interesting over the next few quarters to see how this will play out longer term once anything exceptional that was happening in this quarter gets factored out.

Personally, I get by with Elements and LR. I aspired to owning the full blown PS, but maybe never would have actually bought it because of the large up front price. However, I will never go down the subscription route even with the supposedly low entry price.

17 upvotes
Irata
By Irata (10 months ago)

I was gonna post the same (about Microsoft's XBox backtracking), but you beat me to it :)

Let's hope that Gimp or Corel turns out to be for Adobe, what the Playstation is for Microsoft's XBox.

The more people will stay away from CC, the better. And if I owned Adobe shares, I'd sell them RIGHT NOW. As others have stated here already, Photoshop CC has already been pirated.

As for me... I do a lot of high end retouching, and Adobe CS6 is more than enough for my needs. In a few years time, I'll just buy the last available system/machine which supports CS6 and then stick with this for professional use... or simply move on to Gimp or whatever may be available (AND: the new standard!) at the time.

8 upvotes
Walter
By Walter (10 months ago)

I am surprised a professional high end retoucher would move away Adobe...... I am also surprised you would sell your shares now just before a big influx of money. Once the word gets out that people are enjoying the upgrade the song will change...it always does on Dpreview. ...I can still remember the who ha over the 5D MK111 ...now everybody wants one. Same will happen when Canon bring out the 5D MK4.

2 upvotes
LensBeginner
By LensBeginner (10 months ago)

@Irata: you can always short-sell them...

0 upvotes
Just a Photographer
By Just a Photographer (10 months ago)

First 5D MKIII is far far away - first Canon 3D then in another 3 years time it might be time to exchange the 5D III for the 5D V.

But this is not about hardware, this is about software.
Software that has already been hacked - within ONE DAY of its launch.

How do you think Adobe can make money if you can get a product for free! Outside of a renting model that was supposed to be the BIG and INDEFINITE MONEYPIT?

If I was a shareholder I would run before this moneypit runs dry due to the fact that you don't need a rental license to make use of Adobe's Cloud....

Comment edited 57 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (10 months ago)

Walter, I think there are some people here who have a firm grasp on what they want from software companies from many years of experience in both business and hobby shooting. Your surprise is unsurprising because you seem to have become part of the digital revolution without any thought as to the implications of decisions made by the software and hardware companies. To you, it simply is what it is. Hardware issues like the 5DIII are not the same as workflow concerns that will develop and exist over years and for decades. A camera body is a fairly short term decision, but workflow is like choosing what equipment to put in your darkroom: you're going to live with that decision on a daily basis for a very long time.

4 upvotes
Walter
By Walter (10 months ago)

Howard People have done exactly as you say...they have thought out their workflow and many have chosen Photoshop for years....granted not everyone. Most of the decisions Adobe have made with regards to the actual software product have helped many photographers achieve things they could only dream about in the past.The new CC doesn't affect workflow it affects the pocket book and that is the real issue which each one will have to decide for themselves. I have a firm grasp on what helps my pictures work for my clients and for my workflow I use Photoshop. If I was not a professional I would make do with my CS6 version for now and wait to see what comes. If I appear unsympathetic for those who have always paid their way that is not so. There is a very unsavoury attitude in the forums which does nothing to help the enjoyment of photography. Face to face over a beer we would probably all have a great conversation and yes perhaps try to put the world right. ;)

1 upvote
Jefftan
By Jefftan (10 months ago)

Can I just paid $19.99 and use it for 1 month?

0 upvotes
Irata
By Irata (10 months ago)

You get a 30-day trial anyway.
But yes, I was wondering the same: if I use Photoshop every 3 months only, can I pay for a monthly subscription, say, 4 times a year?

0 upvotes
Josh152
By Josh152 (10 months ago)

No, without the annual contract it is $29.99 a month.

http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop/buying-guide.html

0 upvotes
Michel J
By Michel J (10 months ago)

Do Adobe invest into the "Clouds milk market" to practice fiscal evasion?
By moving HQ in the air...

If yes, I would pay them with virtual money for a virtual place:
http://www.rue89.com/sites/news/files/styles/comment_image/public/zapnet/comments/godwin_point_by_seboun.png

0 upvotes
meanwhile
By meanwhile (10 months ago)

I understand all the CC/cloud/Death to Adobe hoohaa, but ... how well does the Camera Shake Reduction feature work?

1 upvote
Josh152
By Josh152 (10 months ago)

My guess is poorly but we'll have to wait for reports form real people using it on real images to know for sure.

0 upvotes
meanwhile
By meanwhile (10 months ago)

Yeah, I was kind of hoping to hear from one of those real people.

1 upvote
Anders F Eriksson
By Anders F Eriksson (10 months ago)

I gave the new function a quick try yesterday, and although I can't say I yet grasp exactly how to use it ultimately it seems to work fairly well.

This is a somewhat shaky image taken years ago: http://www.fotosidan.se/gallery/viewpiclarge/348303/2944840.htm

And here is how it looks after going through the shake filter: http://www.fotosidan.se/gallery/viewpiclarge/348303/2944841.htm

1 upvote
Irata
By Irata (10 months ago)

No need for the "new" camera shake reduction tool... this has already been possible for many years, using the emboss filter:

http://blip.tv/3photoshop/advanced-sharpening-removing-motion-blur-with-the-emboss-filter-379033

Just apply the above tutorial to a separate layer, and then "mask it in" in areas of motion blur. Works a treat!

1 upvote
madeinlisboa
By madeinlisboa (10 months ago)

That's precisely why PS is becoming a toy for bad photographers...

3 upvotes
CanonPhotog
By CanonPhotog (10 months ago)

Anders, the "fix" that you've demonstrated, based on the examples you've shown, is possible without a special camera shake reduction tool, and quite easily I might add. Adobe needs to drastically update its PS software, and give customers a choice of purchasing, or subscribing, or they're going to lose a lot of loyal customers. ;)

0 upvotes
Anders F Eriksson
By Anders F Eriksson (10 months ago)

Sure - it's possible to do withouth this tool, and I only gave it a quick try. It might also be that only bad photographers ever shake when shooting :)

I might be biased though, since I've been using CC for more than a year now ...

I don't think I'm that bad a photographer though, since I just last week sold four images for a sum that would pay about eight years of full CC usage ;)

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
intensity studios
By intensity studios (10 months ago)

or you could just use a tripod

1 upvote
meanwhile
By meanwhile (10 months ago)

Why do people who understand what something is for, and understand why something occasionally happens (and likely has happened to them multiple times), constantly feel the need to crap on anyone who might find something useful? It's just unnecessary, and poor behaviour.

1 upvote
TheDman
By TheDman (10 months ago)

Anders - is that pub the Craignure Inn, by chance?

0 upvotes
jefflins
By jefflins (10 months ago)

Want to hear a decent model: Adobe could go to a cloud model. They could charge an amount equal to essentially "forcing" everybody to upgrade every 18 months. Price: $10 a month. Prepay a year, $99. Give existing owners a free period of subsription based on their version: CS6=free 18 months, CS5=free 6 months. Nothing for CS4 and earlier.

Would such a model attract 2 times as many users? (or slightly more due to bandwidth, storage customer svc costs which eat into the costs). I don't know.

Oh well, not going to happen. So here's my idea: convert my raw files to TIFF, JPG or DNG in Lightroom and use CS5 for the next 5-10 years, by which time a suitable competitor will arise...likely in the freeware space.

3 upvotes
Jefftan
By Jefftan (10 months ago)

there will be no lens correction for any new lens

0 upvotes
Irata
By Irata (10 months ago)

Pay for the cloud, and after a certain time of paying (i.e. 2-3 years), that CURRENT version of Photoshop on your local computer "belongs" to the user, i.e. doesn't need subscription payment any more.

Only those who need the latest & greatest new features, or newer versions, keep paying. People happy with older versions turn subscription into ownership.

That could be a compromise. But with the current "subscription only" model, I hope Adobe will get what they deserve.

The BIG threat here is: If this works out for Adobe's favour, other companies will follow due... and in the not-too-distant future, all our software may be cloud based...

1 upvote
Toermalijn
By Toermalijn (10 months ago)

@Jefftan,
Camera raw is NOT the only tool for lens correction. Plenty of good substitutes.

0 upvotes
dual12
By dual12 (10 months ago)

Adobe is dead to me.

10 upvotes
jefflins
By jefflins (10 months ago)

Yeah, monthly payments are great. For people who don't "get" finance. At the end of the day you have to ask "how much is the total cost". I've seen so many young people suckered into "payments" they could afford for cars and for car insurance (from low life insurance companies where the broker would finance the insurance and these kids would still sign off on the truth in lending docs where it said they were paying a 30% finance fee). Just because you can afford it doesn't make it a good deal.

Photoshop costs 240 a year now, almost a grand for 4 years. And the longer you keep it, the more expensive it gets relative to the old plan. But hey, the good news is if you just paid $600 for it you get a $120 discount on your future subscription!

Bottom line: for people used to the WELL ESTABLISHED upgrade policy of the last 20 years or whatever, this product just more than doubled in price. Food for newbies, but it's a slap in the face to those of us who were already had paid.

6 upvotes
Valiant Thor
By Valiant Thor (10 months ago)

All of the CC apps have already been cracked. Didn't take 'em long.

4 upvotes
razadaz
By razadaz (10 months ago)

I am sure Adobe expected this, but it will be of little concern. I think they see this version as the first step towards a fully cloud based model. Once their apps are fully cloud based they cannot be cracked because the software will never be installed on your pc, you will merely have access to it running remotely on their servers.

1 upvote
Josh152
By Josh152 (10 months ago)

@razadaz that is still at least a decade or two away given the current abysmal state of the internet infrastructure in the west, let alone developing countries. For the kinds of files Adobe CC deals with we are talking needing at least a gigabyte up and down before it is even remotely feasible and I mean on the average connection not just the super expensive high end commercial service.

3 upvotes
CBuff
By CBuff (10 months ago)

@razadaz - right, have you ever tried LTE/3G in wyoming, montana, or most other scenic states and locations? or have tried gogo in flight wifi? Workable internet for cloud based photo processing for landscape photographers: not in my lifetime ... sniff

3 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (10 months ago)

Wow, I hope all my computing can be done online in twenty years. That way my computer will essentially be worthless without subscribing to all of my software every month and companies and governments can gather unlimited information on every single thing I do. I'm sure they won't use the information for marketing purposes or abuse their power. Josh, you're in a big hurry to have no power, rights, privacy, control...would you like to rent your CD's?

5 upvotes
razadaz
By razadaz (10 months ago)

I think what many people fail to realise is the concept they are promoting is that you keep your files stored in the cloud. If you are then working on them in “the cloud” even a slow internet connection will work because minimal data is being transferred, you are in effect working remotely and only transmitting commands not data. The only time you need to transfer a large amount of data is when you want to download or upload and image to the cloud.

0 upvotes
madeinlisboa
By madeinlisboa (10 months ago)

What you mean is all your work will be shared. Do you really believe that only you has access to your photos? How naive....

1 upvote
howardroark
By howardroark (10 months ago)

Raz, the computing is not taking place remotely. File storage may be offsite but computing is done with the full program on your home computer. The only data transfer is the file.

0 upvotes
razadaz
By razadaz (10 months ago)

howardroark , yes it is at the present time, but this is the model they are looking to move to. that's why I said it's the first step towards a fully cloud based model.

0 upvotes
Josh152
By Josh152 (10 months ago)

But even with the files on their rented server farm (what the "cloud" really is) while you work on them you still have to up load them to work on them then download them again when they are finished. For pros who cant wait several days for a large video project for example to upload and then several more days for it to download again to give it to the client at least a gig up and down will still be needed. Or imagine a wedding photographer/event who has to upload all 2000 raw files they shot just to sort through them in light room. Even if that adds only 30 minuets to their work flow it will still be unacceptable to them.

For landscape shooters or people who travel they may not even have a good enough internet connection half the time to even get the files to the server in the first place. So as I said at least several decades of internet infrastructure development are need before this is even remotely possible.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 10 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
lbuclk=
By lbuclk= (10 months ago)

To @Alternitive Energy Photography. Then you never/read that even Amazon & Microsoft cloud systems went offline a few times? regardless of what they say/print, systems can go down
:http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-57537499-93/amazon-cloud-outage-impacts-reddit-airbnb-flipboard/

http://www.wired.com/insights/2012/11/amazon-google-outages/

http://www.networkworld.com/community/blog/microsoft-confirms-bpos-cloud-outage
Adobe should prorate for outages, will they be forgiving if for whatever reason your payment is late?

0 upvotes
Rage Joe
By Rage Joe (10 months ago)

Criminal Cloud

5 upvotes
OBI656
By OBI656 (10 months ago)

Let's stop beating around the bush. This C.C. thing is one BIG B.S.

4 upvotes
Josh152
By Josh152 (10 months ago)

LOL did you read these comments? If anything more restraint is need not less lol.

0 upvotes
Primrose Wood
By Primrose Wood (10 months ago)

Adobe has three types of user
1) students etc who are content with pirated software
2) wealthy customers for whom a CC subscription is a minor expense
3) users who are on the margin between 1) and 2) - and my guess is that most of the grumblers on Dpreview are in this category, as I am.
For Adobe, '3)' is the important group. They can and will subscribe to CC - and if the cloud diminishes piracy (and therefore professional competition) they will be pleased.
There is a risk that CC will discourage educators from teaching Adobe software - but this can be managed with a sensible pricing/licensing strategy for students.
I sometimes wonder if Adobe has tolerated piracy as a means of stopping competitors from developing rival products. Why should anyone buy Sony Vegas if they can get pirate copies of Premiere Pro, etc etc?

Comment edited 58 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Artistico
By Artistico (10 months ago)

I will go against the general consensus and say that I think the subscription model might even reduce the number of pirated versions in use as it makes the initial cost of starting out using Adobe products so much more affordable when you spread the cost over time. I'm not saying it necessarily is cheaper in the long run, but it's more convenient for many, myself included.

Also, a lot of the people commenting don't seem to know anything about what the Creative Cloud is, how much it costs, and nor do they realise if and to what extent it affects them. They just seem to be against it on principle without even having defined the principle to start with. Please read up on it and understand what it is all about before commenting (as if that is ever going to happen).

1 upvote
Josh152
By Josh152 (10 months ago)

I agree. Think about all the future pro creatives in high school/ college who stared out using pirated CS software to learn it. Now they may actually be able to buy it instead. Just take PS. $19.99 a month is easily affordable to a high school kid on a part time job or their parents who maybe even give them a much larger than $20 a month allowance anyway. While over the long term it is more expensive, the subscription pricing has greatly reduced the cost of entry. This will most certainly lead to people buying when they wouldn't have be able to before.

0 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (10 months ago)

You're right, marketing departments moving everything to the instalment plan are great at making things seem cheap by charging month to month. Get that kid used to paying every month and he'll do it mindlessly forever. The day he has to cut his cable, stop renting software, eat nothing but soup, and concentrate on living off his savings after a job loss or paying for a medical procedure for himself or family....man, he's gonna be hacked off then.

Comment edited 34 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
razadaz
By razadaz (10 months ago)

Most people are not really anti-cloud, they are just against lack of choice. There is no reason why Adobe cannot offer both. Phase One offer a similar deal to adobe, the licence is constantly checked each time the app connects to the internet. The difference is you only pay for upgrades as and when you want or need them.

3 upvotes
Rob
By Rob (10 months ago)

I disagree. First, with all the focus on government spying on private consumer data, the public will become less amenable to connecting to the "cloud" (a corporate computer system). Second, the pirated version of CC is already all over the internet, so it didn't take them long.

2 upvotes
lbuclk=
By lbuclk= (10 months ago)

I agree with Rob, they could print hard copy disks on demand & ship when ordered, i.e. print about 1,000 copies to lessen warehousing, then when that supply reaches,say,250 copies left, print to replenish the 1,000 its about choice.

0 upvotes
CanonPhotog
By CanonPhotog (10 months ago)

By Artistico (19 hours ago)
"I will go against the general consensus and say that I think the subscription model might even reduce the number of pirated versions."

And the way THAT will happen is through the fact that when you don't have anyone using your software anymore, who is going to want to pirate it? :)

0 upvotes
intensity studios
By intensity studios (10 months ago)

GET A BRAIN, MORAN

USA

Comment edited 31 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
jefflins
By jefflins (10 months ago)

I have not seen anybody articulate the reason I am unhappy, even though I feel it applies to many people.

It's not the DRM. It's not the Cloud or the internet connection. It's 2 things:

1) Price (as many have noted)...I used to get updates for 150 bucks at each release, or every other release....so 18 to 36 months apart. Now I will have to pay $360 to $720!!! At a bare minimum the price has more than doubled.

2) My investment is worth less! This is what I haven't seen written about. I spent a lot of money buying PS with the promise of getting upgrades for a reasonable fee periodically. THAT IS GONE. POOF. I save 10 bucks a month for a year. That is what I get for for my investment. Yes I can keep using the product, BUT THE TERMS HAVE COMPLETELY CHANGED. Nobody has articulated this issue. Sure this pricing is ok for new people that couldn't afford PS. But for those of us that spent hundreds on it, with the promise of upgrades in the future, have been given the screw.

5 upvotes
Alternative Energy Photography

First problem: Confusing "expense" with "investment".

A software license is not an investment, just like a screwdriver is not an investment to a carpenter.

I know what you mean...you bought a cordless driver with all the attachments and two extra batteries. Now you think of it as an investment because it will be easier on your body and allow you to do more work in less amount of time. I get that.

But it's not an investment.

Buying ADBE stock, now that would qualify as an investment.

<ducking from flying objects>

:)

1 upvote
Mescalamba
By Mescalamba (10 months ago)

Isnt definition of investment also anything that can allow you to make money easier, faster?

Its more in lines, you pay for something and expect something in return. And you expect that with your work, money you paid for that "something" will help you make back those money you paid (and more in future).

PhotoShop CC is unlike previous PhotoShops more like additional tax than anything else. Which might be ok for internet connection, but isnt that much for software.

Truth is its hard to separate, but usually software isnt considered to be "service" like for example providing internet connection, or water, or electricity.

1 upvote
LensBeginner
By LensBeginner (10 months ago)

@A.E.P.:
You're playing semantics.
Moreover, jefflins is right.

Investment:
Property or another possession acquired for future financial return or benefit.

So Photoshop fits the bill.

Comment edited 25 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
razadaz
By razadaz (10 months ago)

Many people would never have forked out the (absurd) high price for Photoshop if they did not see it as some kind on investment. It has long been seen as the price of joining the “photoshop club”.

Strictly speaking, I would say that its neither expense nor investment, it's an asset. One of the reasons big business love the subscription mode is that it can now be classed as an expense on the balance sheet.

1 upvote
lbuclk=
By lbuclk= (10 months ago)

Wait until the first CC outage occurs at a critical time when you need it, it may last 30min.,3hrs or longer, it will not happen often, but will they refund your money on a prorated basis for your loss of productivity time? nope.

1 upvote
Just a Photographer
By Just a Photographer (10 months ago)

The answer is: NO they won't.
Adobe is very clear in their wording if you read their license agreement. In fact you can't even sue them for not delivering.
All can be read here: http://macperformanceguide.com/blog/2013/20130508_1a-Adobe-legal-agreement.html

In short: You are being scr@wed.

0 upvotes
Alternative Energy Photography

An outage won't impact anything but reauthorizations and downloads, unless the outage lasts 30 days or 90 days.

The software probably reauthorizes every few days. Or maybe even once per day. But by allowing a 30-day gap between reauthoizations, Adobe has ensured that the customer will be able to tolerate a series of reauth failures before finally losing access to the software.

1 upvote
Josh152
By Josh152 (10 months ago)

@Alternitive Energy Photography,

Exactly. I'm getting sick of all this FUD.

Here's an idea lbuclk=, go read Adobe's FAQs about the CC before posting.

0 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (10 months ago)

Unless you're actually using any of the cloud features that make this plan so extremely useful and valuable. Store you files in the cloud? Better hope they have reliable servers.

0 upvotes
Gregm61
By Gregm61 (10 months ago)

Once you have Photoshop CC on your machine, as long as you have all your work on your computer the only power outage that'll keep you from getting at it would be at your own home, in which case you'll have more things to worry about than not having access to Photoshop....

Photoshop CC sits on your computer just like CS6.

1 upvote
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (10 months ago)

Sometimes a company does something in the best interests of both the company and the consumer. Great when it happens. But when the company is short on new features & ideas and the product already does what people need there are two choices: do something that benefits the customer at the company's expense or do something that benefits the company at the customer's expense.

Adobe is not in business to be liked and they are banking on enough people buying whatever they offer without giving it much thought. Seeing the way people line up to be the first to give Apple their money, this strategy may work.

2 upvotes
Greg Henry
By Greg Henry (10 months ago)

CS6 was my last "purchase" from Adobe (and they didn't even offer me a DVD - it was download only). It will be my last, so I'll just keep using it until one day when the Windows OS advances to the point where It won't work any longer.

I have no doubt that a subscription service works for SOME people, and for those - "hurrah". But it doesn't work for everyone, and that's why for customers who you supposedly appreciate, you offer CHOICES - and Adobe has decided to no longer appreciate a percentage of their customer base by no longer offering those choices.

Call me old school - I like to buy something and hold it. Then buy it later when I choose to upgrade. Adobe no longer wants people like me, or my money, and that's fine - Corel has already said they DO want us, so I'll be doing future business with them: http://www.corel.com/corel/pages/index.jsp?pgid=14900014

7 upvotes
lbuclk=
By lbuclk= (10 months ago)

Agreed.

0 upvotes
Alternative Energy Photography

I did actually think about buying CS6 Master Collection with the intention of keeping it for ten years. That would amortize to about $250 per year in today's dollars.

But I decided not to give them that much money. Corel will serve me fine for the next 2 to 5 years, and then I shall reassess the world.

0 upvotes
CBuff
By CBuff (10 months ago)

@alternative energy photography -- don't buy CS6 -- I tried doing a similar thing with my wife's CS3, keeping it since she is satisfied with Dreamweaver and Photoshop CS3. Guess what ? I upgraded her computer (motherboard died), and Adobe could not support us to move the license to the new computer. Gone ! $1,700 paid 5 years ago, totally gone. Oh well, if you think you will be using CS6 in 10 years, think again.

0 upvotes
Henry M. Hertz
By Henry M. Hertz (10 months ago)

Adobe CEO admits we are stupid....

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/06/19/adobe_q2_customers_disappointed_with_no_boxed_wares/

3 upvotes
Walter
By Walter (10 months ago)

Is that what you read?

1 upvote
Henry M. Hertz
By Henry M. Hertz (10 months ago)

well when a CEO says such things it´s pretty obvious.

they rather cut of their tongue then admit they are not 100% sure what tehy are doing.

so yes kiddo .. that´s what i read.....

1 upvote
Josh152
By Josh152 (10 months ago)

Well Henry despite your rather childish condescension I believe you need reading comprehension lessons.

The CEO was basically just trying to placate all the complainers by suggesting they are listening are looking into solutions for their grievances. People dont' like to be ignored so the CEO was assuring them that he was listening. Whether that will actually translate to any changes in the CC model is questionable though. I guess it depends on how it is doing in 6-12 months. See that's the other thing. By saying what he did it leaves him a credible way to make changes down the road. If he had said everything was perfect for everyone and pretended that no one was complaining, if he wanted to changes to the pricing or what ever in 6 months it would look bad. He would look like he made a mistake, was being arrogant, and perhaps even like he was a liar. It was just your basic PR speak and couldn't be farther from saying "were stupid" which they most certainly arn't.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
JimmyTheHand
By JimmyTheHand (10 months ago)

I guess some of the complainers might be the investors - with those figures and a lot of investors tend to have a rather short term outlook. If it is still bad in 6 months - very likely the CEO will be spending more time with family

1 upvote
Alternative Energy Photography

In other news, according to Investor's Business Daily: "Adobe Reprots Smooth Sailing in Transition to All Cloud Sales."

It's basically a happy-happy article quoting a number of people, including stock analysts, as saying that Adobe has beaten estimates, and most upgrades/purchases now are for CC instead of CS6, and that Adobe is on the path to beat their full-year target of 1.25 million subscribers.

Yes, "SUBSCRIBERS", not customers, not clients, not licensees, not even "users". Subscribers. Like you just bought a Sun Times newspaper subscription. How does THAT make you feel?

I've been saying all along that Adobe will be successful in this because the userbase simply is not angry enough to quit them. So far, I am right.

Meanwhile, yesterday I began a trial of Corel Aftershot Pro and I installed the -1 version of Corel Paintshop Pro X4 on a laptop. Gonna redouble my efforts to make that software work so that I don't have to genuflect to the Adobe false idols.

Freedom!

2 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (10 months ago)

IBD is the kind of publication that thought the DotCom boom would last and last. It's mostly a rightwing navel gazing publication. In other words marketing gloss with a rightwing slant. So in this case not much different than some industry magazine heavily beholden to Adobe.

Anyhow the question would be how sustained the subscriptions are in say 6 months or 24 months.

2 upvotes
razadaz
By razadaz (10 months ago)

The only real way out of this is open source software. I think Corel and such like will follow Adobe into the cloud eventually. Hopefully there will be enough people willing to donate to open source development projects like GIMP to make it a realistic option.

0 upvotes
artlmntl
By artlmntl (10 months ago)

The people who are not doing it don't have to be angry. All they have to do is not subscribe. And I'm sure Adobe is enjoying a bump from people who want Adobe products but don't want CC. Those people are snapping up copies of CS6. More time will have to pass before we see the actual effect of Adobe's strategy.

I have all I need without CC, so I probably don't count. But I advise my clients to avoid CC and they listen to me. So, maybe I cost Adobe a little money, but not nearly enough to affect Adobe's policy.

I doubt they'll have to close down their big, ugly, new design center. I'm just glad I don't ever have to go there. What an eyesore!

Comment edited 21 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
Alternative Energy Photography

HowaboutRAW:
"IBD is the kind of publication that thought the DotCom boom would last and last. It's mostly a rightwing navel gazing publication."

No it didn't, and no it isn't.

IBD called the dot com bubble at the top, and they called the housing bubble. And now gold.

If you disagree, that's fine, but name calling won't help you reinforce your opinion.

I agree with your last comment; sustainment of subscriptions will be the ultimate deciding factor here.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Alternative Energy Photography

artlmntl:
"The people who are not doing it don't have to be angry. All they have to do is not subscribe. "

You are correct of course, but I am looking for a VISCERAL REACTION in my guaging of public relations and public opinion. I'm not seeing it. Therefore I say Adobe has no incentive to change course.

artlmntl:
"And I'm sure Adobe is enjoying a bump from people who want Adobe products but don't want CC. Those people are snapping up copies of CS6. More time will have to pass before we see the actual effect of Adobe's strategy."

No, the article is quite clear. The revenue is coming from CC subscriptions, not CS6 sales.

1 upvote
Josh152
By Josh152 (10 months ago)

Of course Adobe is doing well with the new CC Subscriptions. Why wouldn't they be?

All the talk of Adobe "back tracking" and going out of business is laughable. It's as if people think Adobe became a software giant and the industry standard for creative software by not having any idea what they were doing. As if they think Adobe just out of the blue one day decided to do subscriptions instead of perpetual licensees to stick it to their users with no research to see if it was a good idea like some mustache twirling cartoon villain.

In reality Adobe probably paid a lot of money to accountants, market analysts, and other experts to determine the likely outcome before making such a big move. There is simply no way Adobe did not know it would cause such a big backlash. They figured the estimated loss of customers and the pricing needed to stay profitable and determined they would most likely come out ahead. If that wasn't the case they would not have moved to the subscription model.

0 upvotes
Alternative Energy Photography

I agree. They knew this.

But...history does show us how some bad decisions were rolled back. Examples include "New Coke" and even more recently, the return of the "Start Button" in Windows 8.1 .

Rollbacks don't happen if public sentiment is strong enough. And what I was saying is that I don't think we're there. The userbase is just "taking it". In the gut and the wallet.

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (10 months ago)

AlternativeEPhoto--

Stating facts about the slant of IBD is not name calling. Though I'm perfectly willing to credit them with saying: "jump" to some rats on the sinking ship right before the dotcom crash. The point is IBD treated it as a real sustainable boom, that wasn't going to go away, not the speculative delusion it was.

Nothing to do with IBD, but remember how many times the Ibanks had to bailout Amazon? Some of that was before the dotcrash, and therefore what was coming should have been obvious, and that's where publications like IBD failed.

Thank you for agreeing with my last point about sustained subscriptions to Adobe CC.

0 upvotes
Henry M. Hertz
By Henry M. Hertz (10 months ago)

profit is down this quarter but yes all is fine..... lol....

1 upvote
Alternative Energy Photography

Okay, "howaboutraw":

You have not given any evidence that the IBD article I referenced is invalid or that it contains sloppy reporting/editing, or factual errors. You just keep arguing how you don't like IBD and you're presenting that as your evidence that my comment and conclusions are wrong.

This takes away from my point and it is unfair to me.

The IBD article was an analysis piece on a company. It was not an opinion piece. It was not a political piece. The reporter did the research and conducted interviews with Adobe executives and investment professionals.

Why did you even bother to respond to my original comment? Did you just have to make your point even though it had nothing to do with my comment?

1 upvote
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (10 months ago)

Alter En Photo–

Perhaps I should have called IBD a “flavor of the minute” kind of journal, instead of “navel gazing newspaper”.

Hope that explains why I didn’t bother to read whatever IBD reported as the latest trend/result. I don’t have tens of millions of dollars that I can throw into Adobe stock, or into shorting Adobe, for a few days based on what IBD says. Yes I realize that the shorting would take longer and playout in say 6 months or 12 months when Adobe’s subscriptions decrease.

0 upvotes
Geoffrey Kitt
By Geoffrey Kitt (10 months ago)

Well, after about twenty years it's the parting of the ways for me and Adobe. I won't be joining them on their "creative cloud".

5 upvotes
Alternative Energy Photography

"Note that despite its name, Photoshop CC is not really cloud-based software. It's downloaded and installed locally on your computer, and all your files can be saved locally too. What it does offer is cloud-based storage for your files, so you can access them on multiple devices while on the move."

It is not cloud-based software but it is cloud-based DRM, which is just as bad!

0 upvotes
razadaz
By razadaz (10 months ago)

It will be cloud based eventually of course. Clearly that is the long term game plan.

2 upvotes
Josh152
By Josh152 (10 months ago)

@razadaz

I agree. In fact the future of all software is likely the cloud. Of course it will probably take several decades for the internet infrastructure to support cloud based software that is so resource heavy and that deals with such large files like the Adobe CS does.

0 upvotes
Alternative Energy Photography

To Josh: Cloud-this, cloud-that; it's not so much the cloud that annoys me here. It is the forced subscription model that I don't like because I have no control over the ultimate cost. Not if I want to keep using the software.

2 upvotes
Josh152
By Josh152 (10 months ago)

Well cloud based software doesn't have to use subscription pricing you know.

0 upvotes
Alternative Energy Photography

Right! And that's what I want! No subscription, and then we can talk! :)

0 upvotes
Hugo600si
By Hugo600si (10 months ago)

I hope during the lifetime of my CS6 a good competitor comes up, in anycase the business model will be matured by the time I will consider replacement (in a few years time).
Raw conversion I just keep using LR as per my current flow.

0 upvotes
Plastek
By Plastek (10 months ago)

Pirates: 1
Legal users: 0

Someone should send a lawsuit to Adobe for encouraging piracy.

7 upvotes
Roland Karlsson
By Roland Karlsson (10 months ago)

Also my thought, more or less. OK - PS is already pirated a lot. But ... that is by people that mainly would not buy it anyhow. And a percentage of those will later make their employer buy it.

In the old way of doing it Adobe occupied a huge chunk of the market pirates+advanced amateurs buying+companies buying.

Now Adobe changes that very profitable balance. Less advanced amateurs will buy it, much less IMHO. Companies? I don't know. Some will stop buying it I assume.

So - there will be more pirates and also more companies looking for other solutions.

More pirates might be OK, that still makes adobe keep the market share. But ... the companies searching for other, cheaper solutions?

No matter - this has already been discussed, so I will say no more in this thread.

0 upvotes
Just a Photographer
By Just a Photographer (10 months ago)

Many people that have always bought Adobe's software and always neglegted pirated copies will now rethink and might well start using pirated versions.

In the end that will hurt Adobe and customers that have subscribed to Adobe Cloud legally will have to pay for those who downloaded the pirated version.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
phaedin
By phaedin (10 months ago)

@Roland
Anyone that makes money (generates income like professional photographers, businesses and corporations) from using Adobe, will most likely be happy about the new model.
As it is a tool it is an expense (which is now predictable and regular) which can be written off and which will reduce your Taxes, so it reduces the actual cost of the software.
People that dont make money (like enthusiast photographers) are the ones that are most affected

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
mewickham
By mewickham (10 months ago)

True, rentals can be written off as an expense, rather than depreciated. But, nearly all who use Photoshop in business could write off the whole purchase price at time of purchase using the Section 179 deduction. There's no need to carry over depreciation to following years.

Further, if you buy a license, the license is a business asset. If you sell your company, the value of those licenses increases the value of your company and its selling price. If you expensed the software as a rental, however, there is no increased value to sell. Instead, you are likely to have the liability for future rental contracts, which would be a negative value to the selling price of your business.

Even a hobbyist can resell his license when he's done with it and get most of his money back. But you can't resell your rental contract. The money is just gone, along with any future ability to use the software. DON'T RENT YOUR SOFTWARE.

0 upvotes
Henry M. Hertz
By Henry M. Hertz (10 months ago)

99% of the time you will not notice if you are in photoshop CS6 or photoshop CC.

do you really rhgink the 1% are worth the hassle and money.

only reason for CC is (for some) that adobe forces us via ACR to buy the latest version.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
3 upvotes
Roland Karlsson
By Roland Karlsson (10 months ago)

It is quite obvious that the main reason (for Adobe) is to get a broad stream of money floating in regularly.

0 upvotes
jlehet
By jlehet (10 months ago)

I've upgraded just about every version of photoshop since v2.0, and I also use Illustrator and InDesign, but far less frequently. I will keep these at CS6 unless the current conditions of the creative cloud change. I hope I will not have to rent it, though it might be somewhat more reasonable if there were assurance of future pricing. I don't want to get locked into a workflow and then have the financial ground shift under my feet (again).

I'm kind of sad, this upgrade time. I always like upgrading, and checking out the new features. Instead of giving Adobe the $200 that would have gone to Photoshop CS7, I'll buy the Nik plugin package, which gets great reviews. I will have some new toys to play with, and some good ones too.

0 upvotes
Total comments: 408
123