DaveE1

Joined on Sep 18, 2008

Comments

Total: 593, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Barry Pearson: I'm floating this to see what people here think.
It is obvious that lots of people hate the subscription model, and wouldn't touch it with a barge-pole!
Doesn't that give competitors an extra option they can benefit from?
For many people, Adobe simply isn't part of the available range of competing products, so the marketplace for the competition is increased.
Won't that increase the range of products available, over time? Won't we all benefit in the long term, with extra products for those who can't tolerate the subscription model, and therefore extra pressure on Adobe to keep enhancing their subscription-based products?
(I wonder what the companies competing with Adobe think about Adobe's subscription model? Are they thinking "thank you Adobe"?)

Barry. That makes no sense. It's like saying anyone making negative comments about Canon joined for that reason because they joined DPReview after 1937.

Link | Posted on Jun 26, 2018 at 12:49 UTC
In reply to:

Barry Pearson: I'm floating this to see what people here think.
It is obvious that lots of people hate the subscription model, and wouldn't touch it with a barge-pole!
Doesn't that give competitors an extra option they can benefit from?
For many people, Adobe simply isn't part of the available range of competing products, so the marketplace for the competition is increased.
Won't that increase the range of products available, over time? Won't we all benefit in the long term, with extra products for those who can't tolerate the subscription model, and therefore extra pressure on Adobe to keep enhancing their subscription-based products?
(I wonder what the companies competing with Adobe think about Adobe's subscription model? Are they thinking "thank you Adobe"?)

You come across as very stuck in your ways Barry. There are better ways of doing things these days, so it isn't that impressive to claim to use one product for a LONG time, even with the trickle of updates as you put it. Technology evolves and the most creative pros move with it. I used Lightroom before someone showed me better alternatives. It was once revolutionary for photographers, but was left behind since.
Vik2012 and others brought up the excellent point about the need for CC subscriptions to fully edit CC files later. That alone should have people looking elsewhere. And it would be silly to say that the products Andre mentioned above aren't better than the Adobe cocktail offering.

Link | Posted on Jun 25, 2018 at 12:06 UTC
In reply to:

Barry Pearson: I'm floating this to see what people here think.
It is obvious that lots of people hate the subscription model, and wouldn't touch it with a barge-pole!
Doesn't that give competitors an extra option they can benefit from?
For many people, Adobe simply isn't part of the available range of competing products, so the marketplace for the competition is increased.
Won't that increase the range of products available, over time? Won't we all benefit in the long term, with extra products for those who can't tolerate the subscription model, and therefore extra pressure on Adobe to keep enhancing their subscription-based products?
(I wonder what the companies competing with Adobe think about Adobe's subscription model? Are they thinking "thank you Adobe"?)

Vik2012. I think Barry is using Lightroom, so what I understand from his replies, he doesn't quite get the importance of keeping PSD source files intact and fully editable in 100% compatible software. I also keep the original source files and flatten down or export only as needed. You MUST keep the source files if you are working on client files. There is no way I would want to go back and do all the editing again in a new application. I am really put off by the fact that you can't get Adobe software for a one off price any longer. That's why I have the last version of the Creative Suite on disc and now use Affinity Photo that someone suggested here. No way am I paying a monthly fee just to have a way to occasionally edit Adobe files I once created in Adobe Photoshop CC.

Link | Posted on Jun 22, 2018 at 18:40 UTC

That's the fun with studies. This one shows that shooting and sharing one a day is good.

The previous studies showed that sharing your photos regularly leads to an addiction to "likes" and feelings of rejection from negative comments.

Link | Posted on May 4, 2018 at 23:19 UTC as 33rd comment
In reply to:

saiko: Don't make kids get hooked to Adobe Ransomware Package at a young age - even if they give it out for 'free'.

BaldCol and Gmon750 are playing word games for the Adobe marketing team it appears.

Yes, ADOBE DOES LOCK YOU OUT, as the software required to access and continue your edits STOPS WORKING on cancellation of your subscription.

The only options you have is to flatten down your files and lose your live layers/filters/edits prior to cancellation, or to use an alternative like Affinity that attempts to piece together as much of your Adobe file as it can with layers.

Be warned, if you are in doubt about paying future Adobe subscription prices and increases and you want to revisit old files to tweak saved edits in the source, stay away from Adobe CC.

Link | Posted on May 4, 2018 at 21:01 UTC
In reply to:

otto k: Nope, not even close to actual POV, just imagine footage from normal talking to a female your height. What is the frame showing?

@Otto. I think in that particular case the user may see... a two year suspended sentence, if they don't have a very good excuse, a good defense attorney and a lenient judge.

Link | Posted on Apr 6, 2018 at 21:56 UTC

Hopefully, the previous "Meltdown" and "Spectre " type vulnerabilities are dealt with the new processors without the need for a slowdown fix.

Link | Posted on Apr 3, 2018 at 21:47 UTC as 52nd comment
In reply to:

Vik2012: Lots of DPReview visitor crystal-balls going into the trash after reading this article. DSLR's were predicted to be extinct how many years ago now... 5?, 10? :D

@mgrum. I have also been reading predictions here on the complete demise of DSLR since 2008. If you are a regular forum or comment reader, you would have read them too, even if you don't/won't remember them.

Vik is correct. You might want to follow your own link, as you clearly don't know what a reference to a straw man means. LOL

Link | Posted on Apr 3, 2018 at 21:33 UTC
In reply to:

Team Yeti: Obviously the Creative Cloud is helping them rake in the cash. And good for Adobe and their shareholders -- they are running a business, after all. That's capitalism at work.

You know what else is capitalism at work? Me voting with my wallet not to pay for their subscription-based products. Bring back standalone software please.

NetMage. Gerard above is correct in what he states, so would appear to understand how subscription works much better than you do.

You are deliberately too selective in your choice of words when defending Adobe. The fact remains that you do indeed lose access to editing features when you are locked out of subscription products post subscription. As others have pointed out, that's one of the hooks.

Adobe's own PS file format does not edit seamlessly in other software, so you can ditch your "likely" statement, as it won't cover you if you find yourself having to do that. You will need to merge down some effects and layers and redo them if you want the same control. If you no longer have access to PS, that's a problem.

Link | Posted on Mar 23, 2018 at 23:34 UTC

My condolences to the family and friends of those who lost their lives in the accident.

I understand that the helicopter should have been able to stay upright on the water using inflated floats. Surely those helicopters should be grounded until their safety mechanisms are tested and verified as working as designed.

Link | Posted on Mar 13, 2018 at 18:23 UTC as 29th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

stevo23: Sorry to all those still on Adobe - sorry that we're jumping ship and cause your costs to go up. Hopefully, Adobe gets the message soon. This company is off the rails and someone needs to send a clear message.

Miksto. Inflation?? What on earth are you talking about? If the cliched below inflation argument is your best, then you are stuck to justify this subscription price increase.

Also, any well run, serious photo/video studio or professional will try to keep their costs down. Throwing money at Adobe if they can use a better alternative for less is madness. And there are better alternatives, unlike in the past.

Link | Posted on Mar 13, 2018 at 18:04 UTC
In reply to:

chipmaster: Why is any review or article that is positive to smartphone photography viewed with so much disdain and polarized view from the camera heads, be them mirrorless, DSLR or even medium or film heads. Could you all be just that insecure, LOL.

I shoot with a DSLR, rather high end, matter of the fact, and many times only take a smartphone, I'm comfortable that too. I think all you guys need to lighten up about your insecurity :D

Jeez! dr. noise is one confused little troll.

Link | Posted on Feb 6, 2018 at 12:02 UTC
In reply to:

DrGerm: The problem with all these "shooting XYZ with only a smartphone" article is this: we only ever get to see the shots that the author got. We never get to see the ones he/she could've gotten with a serious camera, but just didn't with the phone.

Exactly the same with any camera. Have you ever seen a shot someone didn't get?

Link | Posted on Feb 6, 2018 at 11:56 UTC
In reply to:

MichelBB: I do not understand how people are so excited about the pics quality. To me the quality is horrible. Just look at shadow parts in the pic "Australian Camp, Pokhara, Nepal." or "Bhoudanath Stupa, Kathmandu". They or not only noisy, they are pixelated !!! I would be ashamed to show that to my family. Seriously. If camera size is so important you can take an a6000 (as an example) with a small fixed lens that fits pants pockets easily. Why taking photos with the smartphone?

You must come from one uptight family if you would be ashamed to show them those pictures.

Link | Posted on Feb 5, 2018 at 19:32 UTC
In reply to:

SASand: To each his own. Why is this worth an article?

Chin up expro! I am sure you will get over it. Sadness, great shame and all.

Link | Posted on Feb 5, 2018 at 19:29 UTC
In reply to:

Chris2210: It's good that the limitations of the technology - generally and specifically - are flagged in the article, but I can't help thinking it would have been wiser to headline the piece ...smartphone to document... rather than 'iPhone'.

I'll add a disclaimer here - I'm a pretty happy [perhaps excluding the price] iPhone X owner. But you KNOW you're going to get howls of protest that the site is being turned into an Apple advertorial.

There's no reason why you shouldn't mention the specific hardware, [in fact it would be strange if you didn't] but it really adds nothing headline it or [by omission] to suggest that the same results might not be achieved by any of the more recent devices made by a host of manufacturers. I know you suggest just that later on in the piece - I just think you're asking for trouble not making the brand in this case of very much more subsidiary importance.

They are accused of fronting for Sony, Canon, Apple, Nikon and more depending on which articles they publish. Everyone has a go at DPReview when they see a "competitor" to their favourite brand.

Like it or not, the iPhone is the single most popular phone on the market and the most popular single device/model for photography. But it's certainly not the only one that gets a mention here.

The article is about photos taken by the writer's dad. He happened to use an iPhone. And I for one am happy he shared them and I got to see those photos. I like them.

We can live with that. There are 460 comments to show that people are interested. If they weren't they wouldn't be clicking and commenting on an article clearly titled as relating to the iPhone.

Link | Posted on Feb 5, 2018 at 13:00 UTC
In reply to:

dr.noise: Well, if someone's preferences and purpose is to make crappy pictures of beautiful places, then OK it's the right tool for the job. What else is there to say. Portraits are more or less tolerable, I don't know why, but my eyes are bleeding looking at the landscape photos in 100%. Otherwise nice pictures are completely destroyed. I think no more than 30% of original details are preserved. Not saying this as a hater, I didn't even look at any Iphone shots earlier and I expected them to be much better, given all the praise.

You claim your eyes are bleeding looking at someone else's photos, but go on to say you are "not saying this as a hater"?

Of course not. (sigh). That would make you a troll, right?

Link | Posted on Feb 5, 2018 at 12:51 UTC
In reply to:

Anulu: I missed when dpreview announced they are official apple advertising site...

It's only a few week since people were accusing them of advertising for Sony because there were a few articles on Sony products. And not long since people accused them of advertising for Canon.

Not easy keeping children happy. They'll cry when they don't get their favourite feed. Hopefully the complainers will grow up to enjoy a varied diet of news and views on lots of different brands without bawling at every article they don't approve of.

Link | Posted on Feb 5, 2018 at 12:42 UTC
In reply to:

David Tembleque: I find these pictures an insult to any photographers work.
If you are looking for compact size, just buy a proper compact camera.

I care about the size a lot too, here is what you can do with a 900€ camera that fits in the palm of your hand:

https://www.davidtembleque.com/vietnam

I agree with the others. The insult comment is a bit much; both unnecessary and ignorant.

I also prefer the natural look of the iPhone photos to the Instagram filter look too.

Link | Posted on Feb 5, 2018 at 12:09 UTC
In reply to:

M W B G: What a load of iPhone advertising crap. Enough with the iPhone propaganda. We know they are paying you but we've seen enough

MWBG, How is featuring the single most popular smartphone in the world in articles biased?

Considering it is also one of the most popular devices for taking photos, it has a place on a photography site as much as any other DSLR, mirrorless, compact or other type of camera.

Anyway, stop clicking on articles clearly titled as being iPhone related if you have such a problem with reading about them. Even if the site was biased, that is their business, just go to one you prefer better.

Link | Posted on Feb 5, 2018 at 06:04 UTC
Total: 593, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »