QSMcDraw

QSMcDraw

Joined on Dec 27, 2011

Comments

Total: 33, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
In reply to:

BrianCanuck: "Adobe's announcement of a definitive move to the Cloud is proving to be very controversial, and somewhat misunderstood" - quote from one of my favorite websites.
I feel like a child in classroom being talked down to by the people that I respected, bought their Adobe based instructional materials, and attended their programs over the last 11 years. They are on the inside of Adobe.... maybe the window is a little fogged to the outside world.
I do not see any misunderstanding - the message is very clear.

A child? Ha. More like the proletariat in a crushingly tyrannical authoritarian society, being fed the latest propaganda about war is peace, freedom is slavery, etc, etc. Thanks, Mr. Orwell!

Link | Posted on May 9, 2013 at 17:19 UTC
In reply to:

piratejabez: I don't really get it... Doing the math, the subscription is cheaper than buying the software license outright, especially for what you get. It takes a couple years at least of monthly subscription to reach the traditional price, which is about the time many users may want to upgrade anyway. Plus you get access to every piece of Adobe software available, so you can play with apps you may not have had access to before. And if you only need one app like Photoshop or Lightroom, the price is even more affordable. Yes, I do worry about future price increases, but for now I think there's way to much fuss.

Only cheaper if you make the mistake of using the promotional introductory price as the true, ongoing cost. Like cable companies or others that give a teaser rate, then kick in the 2x regular rate.

With my own copy on my machine, I can keep or drop internet service, I can delay upgrades a year, I can stop using the product for months while not paying...

Link | Posted on May 9, 2013 at 17:16 UTC
In reply to:

AngryCorgi: This reminds me of when I bought my first condo. At the time, the condo fees were $325/month, which was high for the area, but I got a great deal on the unit. I thought, well, I'm ok with the combo of my mortgage and condo fee. I said, "hey, they are the highest around, I'm sure they take great care of the facility for that and its unlikely to go up too much". Fast forward 6 years. The condo fee has balloned to $555/month AND I had to pay a "special fee" of $1085 to upgrade the elevators that were not part of the condo fee! But I'm married to the condo fee with my ownership, nothing I can do. I'm stuck. So I sold the place right before the housing market took a nose dive.

This is how I see this "subscription" arrangement. You always have to pay and there is no incentive to provide an improving product. If they raise the price, you still have to pay. All your work is saved in PSD files!

I promised myself I'd never again own a condo and the same goes for Adobe's sub scheme.

Wow, have you nailed one of the key dangers for consumers. Excellent!

Link | Posted on May 9, 2013 at 17:12 UTC
In reply to:

Clint Dunn: The funniest thing about the litany of complaints here is that the majority of you don't pay for the SW...you use pirated copies. Go ahead...tell me I'm wrong:) For every Pro out there with a legit copy of PS is a 'Pro' doing $500 weddings on weekends with $2000 of SW they got off a torrent site.

Hi, Teila. Do you have a source for your "100x"?

And do your really doubt that the brilliant hackers in China will find a way to crack the monthly re-activation?

This is not about piracy--its about highway robbery--by Adobe!

Link | Posted on May 7, 2013 at 02:35 UTC
In reply to:

QSMcDraw: Adobe knows customers hate this. How do I know? Because Adobe won't give us a choice.

They could still get rid of boxes and disks and sell downloads to those of us who want to pay the full price up front, and they could charge monthly for those who choose to go that route.

They know the math, and so do we, which is why we are being forced to pay by the month or have no way to re-edit, or in some cases even open, psd files that will become held hostage.

Some of the apologists here work for Adobe; some just like to play devil's advocate. Some, sadly, are the same sort who have apologized for tyrants and charlatans throughout history.

Those professional can get angry though, and start to deeply resent a company they helped build, and chafe at the bit for competition.

Link | Posted on May 7, 2013 at 02:30 UTC
In reply to:

Clint Dunn: The funniest thing about the litany of complaints here is that the majority of you don't pay for the SW...you use pirated copies. Go ahead...tell me I'm wrong:) For every Pro out there with a legit copy of PS is a 'Pro' doing $500 weddings on weekends with $2000 of SW they got off a torrent site.

Clint, have you considered that it might be your circle of friends that is shaping your views? I know dozens of amateur and pro photographers with PS CSx, and not one of them has pirated the software. They are loyal customers, some who see PS as a luxury, as something a little too dear that they really wanted.

They won't buy into the subscription model that ends up doubling or tripling what they paid for a disk. Many will figure out how to keep running versions of Windows that can run whatever version of PS they currently own. And feeling happy and producing incredible images.

Link | Posted on May 7, 2013 at 02:27 UTC
In reply to:

Falconest174: This is absurd. i want something I can put on my OWN hardware and configure to MY liking not some corporate wonks idea. As for the 'Cloud' idea, this has got to be the dumbest thing to come along it 30 years. What happens if you can't connect or the entire system goes down? SOL bub! All this online only stuff is dependent on the continuing availability of access and continuing increases in online speed. Do you really want to wait for a 6-25 MB file to upload and download (large files from high MP cameras) No thanx. Looks like Elements 10 is as high as I get w/Photoshop. I am sure thankful that I usually use ACDSee Pro 6 for most of my PP editing work.

Framer, you aren't contributing to the thread, you are simply insulting understandably angry Adobe customers. About 20 times today, it seems.

G'night, mate.

Link | Posted on May 7, 2013 at 02:23 UTC
In reply to:

QSMcDraw: It took JC Penney about six months to figure out what an idiot their CEO was, another two months to send him packing.

Hope Adobe figures things out even faster.

"The bill for J.C. Penney Co.'s first year under Chief Executive Ron Johnson is in, and it's about $4.3 billion." WALL STREET JOURNAL, Feb. 28, 2013

And you think the CUSTOMERS were stupid?

Umm, I'm sure you meant $50 a MONTH. So, for three years that's $1800. Nice math.

Link | Posted on May 7, 2013 at 02:19 UTC
In reply to:

QSMcDraw: Adobe knows customers hate this. How do I know? Because Adobe won't give us a choice.

They could still get rid of boxes and disks and sell downloads to those of us who want to pay the full price up front, and they could charge monthly for those who choose to go that route.

They know the math, and so do we, which is why we are being forced to pay by the month or have no way to re-edit, or in some cases even open, psd files that will become held hostage.

Some of the apologists here work for Adobe; some just like to play devil's advocate. Some, sadly, are the same sort who have apologized for tyrants and charlatans throughout history.

Quit playing the troll.

Vast majority of busy professionals simply couldn't deal with the massive inconvenience of hacking into their own image files.

Competition is on its way. Adobe can't buy out every competitor forever, can they?

Link | Posted on May 7, 2013 at 02:12 UTC

It took JC Penney about six months to figure out what an idiot their CEO was, another two months to send him packing.

Hope Adobe figures things out even faster.

Link | Posted on May 7, 2013 at 02:04 UTC as 487th comment | 4 replies

Adobe knows customers hate this. How do I know? Because Adobe won't give us a choice.

They could still get rid of boxes and disks and sell downloads to those of us who want to pay the full price up front, and they could charge monthly for those who choose to go that route.

They know the math, and so do we, which is why we are being forced to pay by the month or have no way to re-edit, or in some cases even open, psd files that will become held hostage.

Some of the apologists here work for Adobe; some just like to play devil's advocate. Some, sadly, are the same sort who have apologized for tyrants and charlatans throughout history.

Link | Posted on May 7, 2013 at 01:54 UTC as 492nd comment | 7 replies
In reply to:

Photomonkey: Yay, I love the new upsurge in independent premium lens makers. Let's hope this sees a flood of new quality optics.
I am looking forward to the real world performance of this intriguing lens. Yes, I can afford the Canon 24 TS-E II but I would love to save some money and support a manufacturer that wants to bring great lenses to market.

Agree 100%. Now if we could see some Adobe facing some real competition as people rebel against the Cloud, we'd be in better shape in PP too!

Link | Posted on Mar 14, 2013 at 01:24 UTC

Can't wait for some thorough reviews!

Link | Posted on Mar 13, 2013 at 18:06 UTC as 55th comment
On article Photoshop Gradient Tool: Blending Images (221 comments in total)
In reply to:

Steve Parkin: Quite a bit of narrow minded thinking from people who feel that their way is the only way to be a photographer.

Really, I think the biggest issue at play is EGO. Thats a hard thing for people to admit to. The point of photography? I always thought it was to create images. A camera records reality the way a camera sees reality. Not the way it really is. We override the camera in such a way that the camera produces things closer to OUR vision. How is that different than Photoshop?
You can use white balance on board the camera to produce a total lie as easily as a layer mask can.

I do not condone dishonesty in image making; I do condone interpretation and artistic license. It seems that there are too many ego driven people stuck on the idea that the best image makers are the ones who can do the best using just a camera. The point of this game is to make great images, right?. Why limit yourself to just a camera in the art-making process? When so much more is out there to use?

I agree that there is a certain purity of viewing experience when we know that a photographer caught a special confluence of elements and did not alter reality. If this is the type of photography you most admire, enjoy! However, to disparage other types of approaches, in this case composites, and sniff that such are, as you bizarrely state, "mere artistry," paints you as pompous, rather than embracing. Photography appeals to so many because it is offers so many ways of expressing oneself. Embracing some does not require us to belittle others!

Link | Posted on Mar 13, 2013 at 15:59 UTC
On article Photoshop Gradient Tool: Blending Images (221 comments in total)

Just had to laugh at the many, many pompous comments about PS being a cheat, or about how many "better" ways this could be done. I remember when these same pompous jerks used to work at camera shops, making beginners walk out, enthusiasts feel stupid...Now most of those shops are out of business. Wonder why?

Link | Posted on Mar 13, 2013 at 15:53 UTC as 37th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Roman_93: It has happend often that companys make up their minds when they get blown away by a social media s*** storm. It is funny how companys try to sell the "latest" technology without realizing that customers now can communicate.

Another point is, that they did everything to create that urge for the latest and newest feature in their customers and now try to make them jump ship with the same feeling.

Time for competition. If capitalism still works somehow a new product will emerge to fill the gap. I am happy to learn new features and better solutions. Without the Nikon - Canon war, cameras wouldn't be as good and affordable as they are now.

Unfortunately, Capitalism is broken, having become corporate feudalism. Governments are simply instruments to protect fiefdoms at this point.

Cheers!

Link | Posted on Dec 12, 2012 at 12:11 UTC
In reply to:

Bubba Satori: Interesting comments.
Did Costco have a firesale on tinfoil hats?
I appreciate the advantages of the Adobe Creative Cloud subscription model.
Allows me to use software I otherwise wouldn't be able to afford with a large upfront financial outlay.
PS user since 2.51.
Happy Holidays everybody!

"Tin foil hats" because we are outraged that the price of Photoshop has more than tripled (for users who upgrade every three years)? I think Bubba is being provocative, like a troll.

Link | Posted on Dec 12, 2012 at 12:04 UTC

The only possible way of slowing this abhorrent exploitation is to refuse to subscribe and to put immense pressure on fellow photographers to do the same.

This effectively triples the price for those of us who upgrade every three years. Looks like Adobe is betting that at least one in three of current users will roll over on their bellies and subscribe, in which case Adobe still wins, as they save on DVD production and packaging. If more than one in three subscribes, it's all gravy.

Note that the subscription rate is "based on annual membership." Tell me there aren't plenty of users who go months without using a software product. Too bad, keep paying.

The apologists here remind me of misguided, cheerful victims of repressive regimes, including those of WWII.

Link | Posted on Dec 12, 2012 at 12:00 UTC as 34th comment | 3 replies
On article Just Posted: Hands-on Canon EOS 6D preview (589 comments in total)
In reply to:

Sad Joe: Had 24 hours to consider my feelings towards the 6D (as many will know I've been awaiting a decent FF body without a massive price tag for ages) and it strikes me that the 6D should/ will be cheap when it reaches the market - Canon have dug up bits from their parts bin - so costs are low, there is NOTHING innovative or expensive to manufacture here - BUT in doing so they have pi**ed off Canon fans like me - we want more for our money (check out the Nikon D600 spec - just a hint Canon) and when the price begins to fall it'll pi** off even more as it will confirm that this Woolworth's camera was light on spec and at £1800 far too expensive. I hate to say this as a proud Canon owner - if I were able to start over I'd go Nikon, the rot set in with the 50D (poor high ISO) then the 7D (complex, suspect AF) now the 6D (hit out of the park by the Nikon D600) - where has the creative passion and drive gone Canon?

Since employees and shareholders of one company or another started posting here--like everywhere on the Web!

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2012 at 15:58 UTC
On article Just Posted: Hands-on Canon EOS 6D preview (589 comments in total)

If a Canon owner is approached by an enthusiastic beginner at this point, and the Canon owner is being honest, can we really say Canon is the best place to invest in a body and a few lenses? Why wouldn't we point out the obvious advantages of the comparatively splendid upgrade options being offered by Nikon?

Just think how many photog teachers who might be Canon shooters now have to say, "I can't really recommend Canon anymore; Nikon has too many great options." Same goes for camera club members, wedding photographers approached during a break, etc.

Canon didn't just disappoint its current trapped customers; it lost a lot of good will and word of mouth so important in this industry.

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2012 at 15:54 UTC as 15th comment | 3 replies
Total: 33, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »