Joined on May 20, 2014


Total: 11, showing: 1 – 11
In reply to:

Lan: Is it just me that dislikes this brand name? Self satisfied and gullible.


I PM'd you through the DPReview system with a few more thoughts and suggestions. Hope that helps!

Link | Posted on Jul 19, 2021 at 21:18 UTC
In reply to:

semorg: I've known the SmugMug team for close to 15 years now . These guys are photographers and are so dedicated to the photography community. It's probably one of the very few companies where their drive is rooted in supporting photographers.

If you have not used them or on the fence, I highly recommend them.

Hi Don. Great to you have your input on this discussion!

I wonder whether the problem is an American English/English English thing?

Over here, the word "Smug" means self-satisfied or conceited. It can only ever have negative connotations. Whilst the word "mug" can be used as slang for "face", in the context of photography, it brings to mind a "mugshot", a word which is most commonly used to describe the photo the police take of someone once they've been arrested!

I don't think these are the contexts you want to bring to mind with your brand.

In terms of alternative names, whilst I could dream up a bunch of suggestions for you, I recommend that you engage a brand consultancy for this. They will be able to help you avoid all kind of pitfalls. On the plus side, your logo is both recognisable and easily adaptable, so if you changed name, you could probably get away without a complete re-brand.

Hope that helps!

Link | Posted on Jul 14, 2021 at 17:33 UTC
In reply to:

Lan: Is it just me that dislikes this brand name? Self satisfied and gullible.

Agreed. As a fully paid up Sumgmug user and big fan of the service, I think the name stinks!

Link | Posted on Jul 13, 2021 at 19:35 UTC
In reply to:

Mathieu Carbou: I would like to see a review and comparison with the Adobe Photography Plan. So far, having the whole mobile and sync echosystem was the only thing making me stick with Adobe.

I'm not sure that's as draconian as it sounds. Clause 3.1 says that you can share some photos publicly, and 3.1 seems to be saying that if you choose to do this, you are implicitly giving the public (ie those who you share with) the right to enjoy your images for free and indemnifying Mylio against a future claim that they themselves should have paid to share the photos through their service. I don't think that's different to any other social media platform.

That said, I'm not a lawyer. Or a user of Mylio. I was just interested by your comment!

Link | Posted on Jul 1, 2020 at 14:38 UTC
In reply to:

wetsleet: not sure if this is just a US/British thing, but is there any difference between "shutting" and "shuttering", other than one is used in normal speech and the other is used all over the web?

"Shuttering" means to close the shutters. You know, those things old houses have on the outside of their windows? It has connotations of withdrawing into, being defensive of, closing to newcomers. I guess the implication here is that the photography assets won't disappear; they just won't be accessible via Fotolia any more.

Shutting is a more general and comprehensive shutting down.

That said, I'm not sure if Americans, or the internet in general, are aware of this subtlety, so the two terms are probably used interchangeably. Language is as language does...

Link | Posted on Nov 8, 2018 at 14:03 UTC

"Both units will be eliminated". By the US Navy. Sounds a bit sinister!

Bad choice of words there!

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2018 at 17:52 UTC as 11th comment
In reply to:

RedFox88: So they fix their program after it goes pay per month. Greedy bastards.

Jafftan, Adobe's software is aimed more at pros than hobbyists. In the professional world, subscriptions are quite normal. In my line of work (financial, not in the slightest bit creative), I have about ten subscriptions for software.

Link | Posted on Jan 30, 2018 at 13:56 UTC
In reply to:

TMHKR: No trial?

30 day money back guarantee, though. Towards the bottom of the FAQs:

Link | Posted on Nov 1, 2017 at 17:21 UTC
In reply to:

GaryJP: Adobe lies. If anyone hasn't figured this out by now they deserve everything they get.

Gary, that's a very cynical way of looking at it. LR (Classic) is a largely mature piece of technology. The subscription model is really the only way that a company can ensure a steady revenue and provide support etc in the long term, which is why it's the norm for professional software, in ALL fields. The alternative would be that, once the software is "good enough" for most of the market, the provider would go out of business.

Note that this is a different argument to the cloud vs local argument, and whether the subscription price itself is too high. I'm not saying Adobe are above criticism; just that this particular criticism doesn't hold water well.

Link | Posted on Oct 24, 2017 at 10:40 UTC
In reply to:

tom1234567: Well I'm waiting for Affinity for windows beta version to come out and then
its goodbye Adobe.
I will persevere until I'm competent with it.
I think Adobe has treated there customers very badly with this subscription
just not worth it.
It's the usual corporate GREED and profit margins that's all they care about
You the customer are just a bank number that pays and pays and pays.
but every dog gets its day ( I hope )

Tom G

Over 3, 5 or 10 years the cost is still only equivalent to a few cups of coffee per month. Introducing time to the equation doesn't affect the fact that the cost of this software rental is low. I spend about £300 per month on professional software for my job. Believe me when I say that £10 per month for Lightroom and Photoshop is a remarkably good deal.

Link | Posted on Jun 22, 2016 at 11:03 UTC
In reply to:

Danny: With Affinity Photo (in beta) and Affinity Designer, Adobe's CC-days are count.

Say NO! to CC, you know why.

Actaully, you didn't invest a penny in Photoshop. You only invested if you bought Adobe's shares, in which case you have a right to influence their business practices. Otherwise, you're just a paying customer. It's different. And, if you were an investor, you'd be very happy with the introduction of CC as it's led to a massive profit increase for Adobe.

For disclosure: I recently migrated to CC after the Aperture announcement and am perfectly happy with it so far. Each to their own. Personally, I don't get this sense of entitlement that lots of Adobe perpetual licence holders seem to have.

Off-topic, but whilst I'm ranting, when I upgraded the OS on my Mac, Aperture was removed by Apple without my consent, and there doesn't seem to be an option to reinstall it, even by visiting my purchase history on the app store. I can accept that they are no longer developing the product for the future, but to stop me from using what I have already paid for? That's just plain wrong.

Link | Posted on Jun 16, 2015 at 16:27 UTC
Total: 11, showing: 1 – 11