Snapseed Adds New Filters, Goes Free

[fr33 loader]

I don't know about you guys but I actually wish that ads are more tailored for me. I wouldn't hate ads as much if its about mountain biking or road biking instead of cooking utensils or cat foods. I wish Google would snoop more of my web activities...

[Donka]

The have ruined the frames module in this release. Previously, you could pick the width of the frame and border - now they are fixed and you only have a relatively small selection of frames. The previous version was almost infinite in it's adjustments.
Also, I hope this is free purely to help promote Google+. I paid full price for this when it was first released and if they start including ads then I will be well p1ssed and requesting a refund. Easily one of the best photo apps around and I truly hope Google don't ruin it as they have with frames!

[bushido]

love this app. quick and easy to edit your snapshots on the move

[legacyb4]

Sounds like I'll be sticking with 1.4.2; glad they made it full-screen for iPhone 5 before being revamped by Google. Wish iOS/iTunes had a way of marking apps as "do not upgrade" as it now becomes a chore to manually update apps one by one...

[brylliant]

Snapseed was free last year, for Apple's 12 days of Christmas app. I have it since then!

[John.B]

Originally Posted by legacyb4

Wish iOS/iTunes had a way of marking apps as "do not upgrade" as it now becomes a chore to manually update apps one by one...

This!

[Donka]

Or versioning so there is an option to roll back to one of the last 3 updates i.e. for loss of functionality like this or if an update introduces a bug which caused crashing etc.

[BJMRamage]

I feel it is FREE as a way to get people to download it and in the news since it is a new Android App. it will most likely go back to full/normal price later. and the more people get it free, the more people "might" start using google+

oh and i HATE HATE HATE the new icon. i wish you could go back to older icons. loved the black but the white is no on.

[Hidesuru]

Originally Posted by CodeBreaker

Got excited, installed it, used it. It is a fine image editor. But as soon I learnt that it got Googled, I deleted it. Not sure why. Anyways, I use the default camera app on my phone to snap, and editing only happens on my Mac, if required.

My guess? Because you are an Appelite, or whatever the reverse of fandroid is (don't really know or care). In other words, just as bad. You admit it was a great app, but that you deleted it solely because it was owned by Google, without even knowing why... ::shakes head::

Not addressed to you: I guess I shouldn't be surprised to see so much anti-google vitriol in this forum, but somehow I still am. This is no better than a mac story on a droid forum. Anyone who starts to feel personally one way or another about a company rather than judging individual products objectively ought to be ashamed of themselves IMHO.

----------

Originally Posted by brylliant

Snapseed was free last year, for Apple's 12 days of Christmas app. I have it since then!

Ahh, but you live in the jolly old UK.

Apparently licensing prevents Apple from doing that in the US.

----------

Originally Posted by fr33 loader

I don't know about you guys but I actually wish that ads are more tailored for me. I wouldn't hate ads as much if its about mountain biking or road biking instead of cooking utensils or cat foods. I wish Google would snoop more of my web activities...

An excellent point, sir. Seeing as how your web activities are most likely linked back to a number (IP or MAC addy) there is very little harm. Remember, Google is a company, not a person, so who cares what they do or do not know? Its not like someone there is personally assigned to review your web traffic.

Not to mention (as has been pointed out elsewhere) there is NO privacy on the net, so don't do something you would be ashamed to tell the world about!

[BJMRamage]

as others have said this has been free many times in the past. this is a way to get more to use it and maybe even their google+

I still think it is the Best photo editing app, especially with the way you can adjust only certain parts of the picture.

[John.B]

Originally Posted by Hidesuru

My guess? Because you are an Appelite, or whatever the reverse of fandroid is (don't really know or care). In other words, just as bad. You admit it was a great app, but that you deleted it solely because it was owned by Google, without even knowing why... ::shakes head::

People's trust issues with Google are of Google's own making. See the link in post #20 of this thread for one example.

Lots of people are skeptical of Google's motives, so it's natural for people question when Google offers something for 'free', "What's the catch?"

[yusukeaoki]

I had this since it first came out which was free.
So I never really paid for it but Im glad its free to those out there that never got a chance to use this.

This app rocks!

[Donka]

I don't care about Google owning Nik Software but I do care about losing functionality which I paid for. One of the great things about Snapseed is the way the interface works and how you can alter things by simple swipes - up & down for the component to change and left & right for the value for that component. This functionality has been removed from the frames module and I'm concerned this may hit other areas of the application as well.

[fsck-y dingo]

Originally Posted by John.B

As a photographer, my concern isn't for Snapseed. I'm hoping Google doesn't kill off the excellent Nik software toolsets such as Viveza, Dfine, Sharpener Pro, etc. that it got in their acquisition of Snapseed.

Same here. I really enjoy the Color and Siver Efex Pro plug-ins.

Originally Posted by nagromme

That said, if Google does anything sneaky with Snapseed, they’ll get caught before too long, so I don’t feel the need to avoid the app. (I won’t sign in to Google with it, though.)

I feel that's true. The app itself is probably fairly benign unless you sign into a Google account. Once signed in, who knows. Still fairly harmless I'd imagine but not going to chance it. I use Gmail but always sign out after using it for email purposes. I never browse the web while signed in. I'll never sign into an account with this app or use the official Gmail app either.

If Snapseed is found to do anything other than it's intended purpose I'll either revert to the previous version or move on to something not yet owned by Google.

[Hidesuru]

Originally Posted by John.B

People's trust issues with Google are of Google's own making. See the link in post #20 of this thread for one example.

Lots of people are skeptical of Google's motives, so it's natural for people question when Google offers something for 'free', "What's the catch?"

Well, we all know Apple would NEVER do such a thing...

I'm not saying Google has never collected user information or anything like that, but the fact of the matter is you really cannot point to a major holder of personal information these days that doesn't have some screw ups along the way, some worse than others.

At least in Google's case they -usually- don't give you the impression that you have some right to privacy when you use their services (ever actually READ their user agreements? Its pretty clear they can do nearly anything they want with your data).

In my opinion Apple gives more of a false impression, but I still don't care. I just operate under the assumption that ANYTHING I put online is instantly no longer private, and act accordingly. Some folks don't want to do that, and that's fine. You simply limit yourself to a very small subset of companies that you can work with, because too many people do not care or are not informed, and as a result public opinion does not force these companies (pretty near all of them) to be better with your info.

I mean, what is it you are doing online that you (the general you) are so afraid of others finding out anyway? The only sort of information I expect to be kept private is stuff like banking information and whatnot that companies explicitly tell you will be kept safe, and that is not (I don't think, correct me if I am wrong) what is at issue in this case.

My original point was just the anti-Google rhetoric I was seeing. I am a recent convert to the iPhone (with the 5) and think that (for me) its a much better platform, but I still have nothing against either company. I have gripes against both company's products (I despise Siri for instance, but cannot stand the UI lagginess in 'droid).

</wallOfText> </soapBox>

[Yujenisis]

The changes are certainly a mixed bag...

I just hope they make the $10 Mac App Store version free too.

I'd love an app for the quick edits I usually have to fire up Aperture with Color Efex Pro to get.

With regards to the whole Google v. Apple thing...The difference is that Apple's business is more straightforward and traditional: Let me sell you a nice thing so that you'll like it and buy more things from me in the future. I make money from you buy the things you choose to buy from me.

Google's business is a completely novel, and IMHO dubious invention: Let me give you things so I can track everything you do with it, everything you give me becomes my property which you have no control over and I am free to sell it to others. The more I know about you the more money I make.

The fact is your examples of Apple's violations of privacy have one significant difference from Google's. Apple's supposed "violations" were used internally only. None of this information was made available to third parties or sold. Apple screwed up for sure with not being more upfront about the nature of their diagnostic tracking. But the very nature of Google's business is disingenuous as they seek to be perceived as a "consumer electronics" company which is truly a Big Brother marketing firm.

[Hidesuru]

Originally Posted by Yujenisis

The changes are certainly a mixed bag...

I just hope they make the $10 Mac App Store version free too.

I'd love an app for the quick edits I usually have to fire up Aperture with Color Efex Pro to get.

With regards to the whole Google v. Apple thing...The difference is that Apple's business is more straightforward and traditional: Let me sell you a nice thing so that you'll like it and buy more things from me in the future. I make money from you buy the things you choose to buy from me.

Google's business is a completely novel, and IMHO dubious invention: Let me give you things so I can track everything you do with it, everything you give me becomes my property which you have no control over and I am free to sell it to others. The more I know about you the more money I make.

The fact is your examples of Apple's violations of privacy have one significant difference from Google's. Apple's supposed "violations" were used internally only. None of this information was made available to third parties or sold. Apple screwed up for sure with not being more upfront about the nature of their diagnostic tracking. But the very nature of Google's business is disingenuous as they seek to be perceived as a "consumer electronics" company which is truly a Big Brother marketing firm.

I can appreciate the points you made there. I do have one thing I disagree with, though. As I said before I don't think Google is being dishonest about their intentions with your data. Its very clearly spelled out in every agreement any user cares to click without reading. While its the norm to do so, I have little sympathy for a user who clicks OK on a legally binding document without even skimming it and then complains...

While I don't think using data internally only makes it OK, there is still a distinction there, yes.

[Yujenisis]

Originally Posted by Hidesuru

I can appreciate the points you made there. I do have one thing I disagree with, though. As I said before I don't think Google is being dishonest about their intentions with your data. Its very clearly spelled out in every agreement any user cares to click without reading. While its the norm to do so, I have little sympathy for a user who clicks OK on a legally binding document without even skimming it and then complains...

While I don't think using data internally only makes it OK, there is still a distinction there, yes.

I am in complete agreement with you that consumers tend to have a very cavalier attitude regarding privacy or even Terms of Use. Too often the majority rely on the whistleblowers or Government regulation to do all the work for them (this is not a political statement).

Where I tend to feel Google is less honest is in their attempts to brand themselves as a consumer-oriented company, which they are not.

They are an advertising company. They are an advertising company that has redefined the limits of what that word means. Their products are the consumers, and their advertising vehicles are the superb interfaces that they put their true business behind.

I have plenty of problems with Apple, but their business is much more straightforward and traditional.