Adobe Carousel Brings Cloud Photo Storage and Editing to Mac and iOS

[MacRumors]

Adobe today announced Carousel, a cloud-based photo storage and editing service.

Carousel allows users to store unlimited JPGs in the cloud, edit and enhance them on the go, and makes it easy for users to share their photos as well. Adobe will be releasing apps for iPad and iPhone on the App Store, as well as an app on the Mac App Store. Android and Windows apps will be coming eventually.

The editing portion is the same technology built into Photoshop Lightroom. It allows users to "fix exposure, white balance, and saturation with a single click, or use sliders to make nuanced adjustments to contrast, brightness, vibrance, and more."

Adobe Carousel is a subscription based service costing US$59.99/year or US$5.99/month. The apps will be released later this year.

Article Link: Adobe Carousel Brings Cloud Photo Storage and Editing to Mac and iOS

 

[jrtc27]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/7E18 Twitter for iPhone)

$59.99/yr for a curves editor and image storage? No thanks!

 

[Shrink]

For that kind of $ - my photos can stay crappy.

 

[marcusj0015]

Sounds like Adobe has nowhere to go and nothing to do, and are afraid of dying. lol


~EDIT~

what kind of "high quality" service only allows ****ing JPEGs??????

 

[MRU]

It's just a shame some of us who use mobileme gallery have to start looking at some of these alternatives. Still can't understand Apple's decision to scrap the MobileMe gallery, l they could have released it in another form as iCloud gallery.... Ive been paying for my .mac/iDisk - MobileMe service for nearly 8 years. I'm dreading losing everything in July next year, for a service which offers me so little functionality instead.

I'll check out Carousel, and if it can provide a user sharable gallery akin to MobileMe I guess adobe will be getting my money...

 

[ironsienna]

Alas, the first apps that will use the cloud will get so much publicity… I feel idiot that I didn't start implementing an app that will make use of the iCloud earlier. Now even the crapiest ones will become famous.

 

[marcusj0015]

or you could just use Flickr... or Facebook... or Google+... or even Myspace if you want.

 

[wackymacky]

Just JPG?

What about TIFF, GIF, or EPS?

Is the service just meant to be for holiday snaps?

Seems like most companies are going town the route of creating for the masses rather than products for professionals.

 

[pubwvj]

I don't trust "the cloud".
I don't trust it to be there when I need it. Witness Amazon's server failures.
I don't trust my data to be secure. Witness the hacking.
I don't trust my data to be available. Witness the limited availability and poor quality of cellular services. Here there are none.
I don't trust the data transmission providers. Look at how they illegally wire tapped for the government and the high fees they charge. Why should I pay for my data?
I don't trust the government to leave me alone. Witness the courts saying no search warrant is necessary for looking in the cloud.
I don't trust "the cloud" one whit.

Far simpler is to have my data on my devices, keep them synchronized, be organized. Think for yourself. Take responsibility. The cloud is a lazy excuse and a poor replacement.

 

[citi]

Just JPG?

Seems like most companies are going town the route of creating for the masses rather than products for professionals.

No disrepect but, Duh?

 

[jayducharme]

I don't trust "the cloud" one whit.

I don't "trust" anything, really, when it comes to technology. Companies are going to keep building out that mythical cloud until it's as ubiquitous as cell service. Soon people will wonder how they ever got along without it. I never thought I need text messaging, but now that I have it I find it essential for certain types of communication.

The cloud is coming. It really will be better than what we have now. It will be as secure as your home computer. The perfect analogy: during the dawn of the 20th century, it was still unusual for people to store their money in banks. They didn't trust banks and didn't want to pay for their services. People were content with keeping their money at home. But eventually people had too much money to safely keep in their houses. The same is now true with data.

I can't wait for the cloud! I don't blindly trust it, but it sure beats what I've got now.

 

[wackymacky]

No disrepect but, Duh?

My point was Adobe CS and Apple with it's power PC then Pro were tools for processionals.

Both companies are loosing their intreats in that market quite rapidly.

 

[The Beatles]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)

Sounds over priced and for that amount of cabbage, I'd expect to store any type of file format I wanted. Way to go adobe, though I guess I shouldn't expect too much.

About the cloud, I'd rather keep the current idea of local storage. People that are all hot for the cloud will be kicking themselves once the network providers start charging per byte.

 

[MRU]

or you could just use Flickr... or Facebook... or Google+... or even Myspace if you want.

None of those offer a dedicated guy front end for displaying photos simply, but elegantly (like MobileMe gallery) and all require anyone you wish to share your photos with to sign up for an account.

 

[fhall1]

Subscription = Fail

 

[jc1350]

smugmug.com has been around quite a while and it seems it is still the best bet for photo galleries. It does use the subscription model, but you won't be throwing your money away like we did with MobileMe and trusting Apple's gallery to be there.

Some may prefer Google's Picasa Web Albums because it's free.

Smugmug offers a lot of service/customization - depending on the service level purchased.

 

[mijail]

Just JPG?

What about TIFF, GIF, or EPS?

Is the service just meant to be for holiday snaps?

Seems like most companies are going town the route of creating for the masses rather than products for professionals.

What "professionals" use GIFs, and what exactly for?

 

[benpatient]

Just JPG?

What about TIFF, GIF, or EPS?

Is the service just meant to be for holiday snaps?

Seems like most companies are going town the route of creating for the masses rather than products for professionals.

huh?

Why would you say GIF and EPS? Those are probably two of the worst formats available for displaying photos.

And Adobe already HAS a photo product or two that's "for professionals". Maybe you've heard of them? Photoshop? Lightroom?

This is basically a cloud version of Lightroom, just "Lite" for non-pros. It's a good idea. The price seems a bit high, but we're talking about Adobe here...they never have reasonable prices on anything.

----------

My point was Adobe CS and Apple with it's power PC then Pro were tools for processionals.

Both companies are loosing their intreats in that market quite rapidly.

Apple is quickly abandoning the "pro" market, yes. Adobe is not.

They are evolving their consumer line to try and stay relevant. When's the last time someone bought a copy of Photoshop Elements?

This is their attempt to win back that crowd. It may or may not work, but it has nothing to do with their "processional" market, whatever that is.

 

[BJMRamage]

Hmmm, not sure I am keen on this. Price seems a tad high for the service.
I guess I knew there'd be a fee but doing it FREE and either had iAds or with ads on their webpage you need to access when at home could have helped offset the price. But why give away free when you can charge and people will "gladly" pay.


With all the smartphones and tablets I can easily see why Adobe decided to jump into this consumer/prosumer market with this.
Too bad for kids these days who will end up paying way too much for everything in life. Want to watch TV? Don't do it free anymore, buy cable/dish subscription or buy the episodes online. Want a movie, don't pay as you go buy a monthly subscription and watch less than you pay or watch more than you really want to 'offset' the price. Want to listen to music, subscribe to a service to let you listen to your tunes. Between that and the cell/data fees and electricity payouts for all the new digital toys!!

 

[realmike15]

Does it store Camera RAW? No?

No interested.

 

[SiriusExcelsior]

Cloud storage, properly diversified geographically, will beat local storage arrangements for most people as a backup.. With so many earthquakes and hurricanes and all recently, a local service for backup is getting dangerous. Too bad they all cost so much

About the cloud, I'd rather keep the current idea of local storage. People that are all hot for the cloud will be kicking themselves once the network providers start charging per byte.

As if they don't charge per (giga)byte already.. unless you're still on dialup