Adobe Photoshop going to a subscription-based system
Jun 3, 2013 22:31:13 #
Some thoughts on the direction Adobe is going? Adobe is sitting in the center (monopoly) of working on digital files. Most tutorials and books focus on using the Photoshop program. I am not looking forward to this change. I am beginning to wish I where still in the dark room.
Jun 3, 2013 22:36:20 #
WAL wrote:
Some thoughts on the direction Adobe is going? Adobe is sitting in the center (monopoly) of working on digital files. Most tutorials and books focus on using the Photoshop program. I am not looking forward to this change. I am beginning to wish I where still in the dark room.
Although "Photoshop" has become a generic term meaning to manipulate photos, I think more people use other programs. Professionals who make money with their manipulations use PS, but most other people use free or less expensive programs.
There is life after PS.
Jun 3, 2013 23:01:05 #
WAL wrote:
Some thoughts on the direction Adobe is going? Adobe is sitting in the center (monopoly) of working on digital files. Most tutorials and books focus on using the Photoshop program. I am not looking forward to this change. I am beginning to wish I where still in the dark room.
For some good thoughts go to: http://www.bythom.com/index.htm
Down about or a little more in the article.
Jun 4, 2013 02:30:10 #
If Adobe feels they're shooting themselves in the foot because of too many lost customers and dwindling profits, I assume they will then switch back to the original system. They need to stay competive if they want to remain on top.
Jun 4, 2013 07:01:38 #
shutterbug65
Loc: Oakville, Canada
Think about how much photoshop as a program does as it is right now. How much more can be done to improve the program. By that I mean. What could they possibly offer, that would be so absolutely amazing, that it would force me to give up my hard copy version to pay monthly for the same or very close to it program. Not happening in my computer room.
Jun 4, 2013 07:25:01 #
shutterbug65 wrote:
Think about how much photoshop as a program does as it is right now. How much more can be done to improve the program. By that I mean. What could they possibly offer, that would be so absolutely amazing, that it would force me to give up my hard copy version to pay monthly for the same or very close to it program. Not happening in my computer room.
Imagine if you had asked that question five years ago - about any technology. I remember the first time I heard about a camera that could focus itself. It couldn't believe it.
Jun 4, 2013 08:04:05 #
Photographers constitute, at best, 20% of the folks that use Photoshop. So, that young artist who recognizes that Photoshop is "the standard" and wants to have a copy to launch/improve their graphic design career is (historically) faced with finding nearly $1000.00 to obtain that software. Usually doesn't happen, so not wanting to abandon their dream, they find a way to obtain an illicit copy of PS. This scenario plays out more often than not, and it is Adobe who becomes the victim by having their product essentially stolen.
They want to minimize that, while giving that young artist a way to "legally" own the functionality provided in PS. The new subscription service seems to be a very viable method for doing that. Adobe's idea has been justified with over 500,000 subscribers signing on in the short time it has been offered.
It's more a win-win situation than anything, and the direction many software companies have actively pursued.
They want to minimize that, while giving that young artist a way to "legally" own the functionality provided in PS. The new subscription service seems to be a very viable method for doing that. Adobe's idea has been justified with over 500,000 subscribers signing on in the short time it has been offered.
It's more a win-win situation than anything, and the direction many software companies have actively pursued.
Jun 4, 2013 08:14:55 #
brucewells wrote:
Photographers constitute, at best, 20% of the folks that use Photoshop. So, that young artist who recognizes that Photoshop is "the standard" and wants to have a copy to launch/improve their graphic design career is (historically) faced with finding nearly $1000.00 to obtain that software. Usually doesn't happen, so not wanting to abandon their dream, they find a way to obtain an illicit copy of PS.
Software piracy is undoubtedly a problem, but I think the factories in China churning out thousands of copies are the real problem. If an amateur photographer can't afford $1,000 for PS, and he uses a pirated copy, I don't see Adobe losing money. The guy wasn't going to buy it anyway.
I don't see this subscription service hurting Adobe's bottom line. It's the little guys who are complaining, while the big corporations sign up for continuous automatic updates.
Jun 4, 2013 08:38:37 #
Jun 4, 2013 08:40:30 #
HOT Texas wrote:
They will loose money from me, because I not't doing it.
There are too many good alternatives for the casual shooter.
Jun 4, 2013 08:59:41 #
Jun 4, 2013 09:29:12 #
This month in Tim Gray's publication called Pixology he has an article on just that. But Bruce is right, photogs are 20% of Photoshop business. You can keep CS6 in perpetuity if you want and never use the cloud, but that may become outdated and there's a danger of it not being backward compatible. Conundrum.
Jun 4, 2013 10:19:35 #
I bought PSE 1,2,7,9,& 11, basically upgrading every two years. In two years, I will decide whether to switch to one of the many free packages or continue with the packages I have, without support. I definitely will not pay the subscription fees!
I am purely a hobbyist; I quit trying to make money from my hobby (took the fun out of it). The costs of the hardware plus, now, the subscription costs, make this hobby very expensive!
I am purely a hobbyist; I quit trying to make money from my hobby (took the fun out of it). The costs of the hardware plus, now, the subscription costs, make this hobby very expensive!
Jun 4, 2013 10:33:58 #
jerryc41 wrote:
Software piracy is undoubtedly a problem, but I think the factories in China churning out thousands of copies are the real problem. If an amateur photographer can't afford $1,000 for PS, and he uses a pirated copy, I don't see Adobe losing money. The guy wasn't going to buy it anyway.
I don't see this subscription service hurting Adobe's bottom line. It's the little guys who are complaining, while the big corporations sign up for continuous automatic updates.
I don't see this subscription service hurting Adobe's bottom line. It's the little guys who are complaining, while the big corporations sign up for continuous automatic updates.
Jerr, again some stellar think. If only I had PS& oops I do a little patch over one eye on your avatar. I have had more than one person say that Adobe will soar. I am looking for a affordable copy of PS now that I have LR 4. "JR"
Jun 4, 2013 10:57:21 #
Jaime wrote:
This month in Tim Gray's publication called Pixology he has an article on just that. But Bruce is right, photogs are 20% of Photoshop business. You can keep CS6 in perpetuity if you want and never use the cloud, but that may become outdated and there's a danger of it not being backward compatible. Conundrum.
In the past camera raw was not updated after a new version of Photoshop came out. Keeping an older version is fine until you get a new camera. Then the raw files can not be opened in Adobe Raw. ACR. They said they wanted to make ACR it universal. Now what.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.