Adobe Offering Photoshop CC and Lightroom for $9.99/Month to Current Photoshop Owners

[Lone Deranger]

Except you can save it out in any number of different formats when you're done with it and use it in other programs, including Pixelmator if you really still need the layers.

Yeah, good luck with that in the real world. Especially if delivering to clients.
Or when that day arrives when Adobe decides to change something in the .PSD/PSB file format, breaking compatibility (I wouldn't put it past them). How long until 3rd party developers can fix support?

What if you want to watch the same movie again later and you've cancelled service? The same thing happens. You have to subscribe again.

I have the option to go to a store and buy my own copy on Blu-Ray, DVD, digital download, etc. It's really great!

Nobody is angry with Adobe for offering rentals. We are angry with Adobe for making rentals the only option.

 

[zync]

Yeah, good luck with that in the real world. Especially if delivering to clients.
Or when that day arrives when Adobe decides to change something in the .PSD/PSB file format, breaking compatibility (I wouldn't put it past them). How long until 3rd party developers can fix support?

If I'm delivering to clients—and I am—I'm charging them to pay for my costs which include software. So there's not an issue there.

I doubt they'll change PSD/PSB because they are lazy. In either case, I don't need to worry about third parties fixing compatibility because I'm charging people for things. Sure, you need me to change something in that file I made for you five years ago? OK, it'll cost XXXX for me to do it.

I was just pointing out that it is possible to work on files in Photoshop outside of Photoshop. It's not ideal. You could just as easily use gimp if you really want to. Those are solutions that work for hobbyists. I use my software to make money so those issues don't specifically apply to me.

I should also note that I've never given a PSD to a client. I give them a delivery format. JPG, TIFF, PDF, MOV. I never give them the raw files. If they want the raw files, they're going to pay for it.

I have the option to go to a store and buy my own copy on Blu-Ray, DVD, digital download, etc. It's really great!

Nobody is angry with Adobe for offering rentals. We are angry with Adobe for making rentals the only option.

And when the market changes and they stop making Blu-ray devices and discs and yours breaks you're equally SOL. And it's moving that way rapidly.

Doing it allows them to save money by not offering two versions of everything. And in return, we pay less. Markets are a beautiful thing.

 

[TimeSquareDesi]

I agree with all of the anti-software rental sentiment on this thread.

This would be a great time for a competitor to come in and take away Adobe's customers but I can't think of a product that is as fully featured :-/

 

[glutenenvy]

The underlying problem is that you are required to have a good working internet connection when you use rented online software. That company must be reputable and you have to have a lot of trust it never goes away so you can do your business.

There is no guarantee of permanent anything with online rented software. It makes little business sense to make a tool central to your business that could suddenly go away in a puff of smoke. It not the rental cost but this reason I would venture as the primary reason for the underlying hostility in this thread.

You are dead in the water if for any reason your connection is down. The only time I could ever recommend using business software that runs in the cloud is when your devices are so 'dumb', as in dumb terminals and iPads and such, that they cannot run except over the network. Even then it is going to be limited to one thumb and that was the thumb mangled in an industrial accident, so it is only a partial thumbs up.

You can blame online software rentals on all the 'PC is dead' news articles. Software companies panic at these predictions and try to position for the perceived future of underpowered tablets and smartphones, where their only choice is to run the software on their own equipment and serve it to you over the web.

 

[zync]

I agree with all of the anti-software rental sentiment on this thread.

This would be a great time for a competitor to come in and take away Adobe's customers but I can't think of a product that is as fully featured :-/

This is cheaper for me right now. But I welcome someone to come down and change things. Give Adobe competition. That would only help everyone. They still have things to fix, prices could be cheaper, and more innovations could be made (which is why I also write scripts for Adobe software).

 

[ProwlingTiger]

How old is everyone here?

I'm 24 and I sure hope my generation or younger doesn't "grow into this" but smell the trouble right away.

I don't want this to work out for Adobe one bit.
If they succeed it means more software will be delivered in this fashion and one thing I can tell you, if it means I'll use super ridiculously old software in the future, so be it.

Glassed Silver:mac

22 here. And I'm not only hoping their new model doesn't succeed, but I'm predicting it won't.

 

[zync]

The underlying problem is that you are required to have a good working internet connection when you use rented online software. That company must be reputable and you have to have a lot of trust it never goes away so you can do your business.

There is no guarantee of permanent anything with online rented software. It makes little business sense to make a tool central to your business that could suddenly go away in a puff of smoke. It not the rental cost but this reason I would venture as the primary reason for the underlying hostility in this thread.

You are dead in the water if for any reason your connection is down. The only time I could ever recommend using business software that runs in the cloud...

I cut this down to the relevant sections. This has nothing to do with it. Cloud is mostly a misnomer in Adobe's case. The software doesn't run in the cloud. It doesn't need a constant connection either.

These programs install to your hard drive just like any old Adobe product. They phone home once a month. If it fails, they try again. After a certain amount of failures, it won't open.

So basically, you just need to connect once a month.

And I don't expect Adobe to go out of business any time soon. If they did, a lot of industries would be in much more of a pickle.

----------

22 here. And I'm not only hoping their new model doesn't succeed, but I'm predicting it won't.

29 here.

This will help the younger generation because the cost of entry is MUCH lower than it used to be—except for the other avenue, piracy.

I don't know if the Photoshop/Lightroom version will succeed, but the full cloud version definitely is. As I said before, everyone I know uses it. I brought this thread up in the office a little bit ago and the response was basically, "are they nuts?"

----------

I can't really add any more to this discussion but what my experience is—and that is that it's a welcome change in my industry. I'd expect it to continue and I'm sure Adobe is doing well by changing. So I'm sorry to the people who are "rental" averse. It works better for me and everyone I know. But at one time I was in that camp. Thankfully, now I'm not.

So it was great discussing this with you guys, but I've got to get some boards out and coming back to this thread with every new reply just isn't helping that/ Enjoy, perhaps I'll check back later but for now I'm unsubscribing.

 

[iMikeT]

Someone obviously doesn't understand what Lightroom is.

I understand perfectly well what Lightroom is. It's for people who are either too lazy or too stupid to learn Photoshop and Bridge, let alone a computer system. To me, Lightroom is another unnecessary program that one convinces themselves or is convinced into purchasing in addition to Photoshop when they get the same tools found in Bridge, for free. In fact, it's nothing more than Bridge with some key features of Photoshop built-in, so Bridge on steroids.

What ever the case, Adobe makes money off the morons who decide to feed the Cash Cow or too stupid to learn their tools.

 

[dlbmacfan]

The underlying problem is that you are required to have a good working internet connection when you use rented online software. That company must be reputable and you have to have a lot of trust it never goes away so you can do your business.

There is no guarantee of permanent anything with online rented software. It makes little business sense to make a tool central to your business that could suddenly go away in a puff of smoke. It not the rental cost but this reason I would venture as the primary reason for the underlying hostility in this thread.

You are dead in the water if for any reason your connection is down. The only time I could ever recommend using business software that runs in the cloud is when your devices are so 'dumb', as in dumb terminals and iPads and such, that they cannot run except over the network. Even then it is going to be limited to one thumb and that was the thumb mangled in an industrial accident, so it is only a partial thumbs up.

You can blame online software rentals on all the 'PC is dead' news articles. Software companies panic at these predictions and try to position for the perceived future of underpowered tablets and smartphones, where their only choice is to run the software on their own equipment and serve it to you over the web.

The software is installed locally; it doesn't run in the cloud.

 

[Kebabselector]

I understand perfectly well what Lightroom is. It's for people who are either too lazy or too stupid to learn Photoshop and Bridge, let alone a computer system.

I think it's safe to assume you don't then.

 

[Will do good]

What? This is the most ridiculous post so far on this thread. Do you also still only accept artwork on Zip drives???

I too am a creative director and my CLIENTS are using CC, so should I tell them "sorry, I can't work with your files can you downgrade to CS6 please?"

If you're a professional then CC subscription is buttons and makes financial sense (I've posted on this previously, so can't be assed detailing costs again).

Good luck with the business, you'll need it with that attitude...

Guess what, when you work with Fortune 500 clients, they don't need your files. All they wants are things get done and I DO get to tell my studios what I want and how I want them. Welcome to the big league.

 

[iMikeT]

I think it's safe to assume you don't then.

In that case Mr Knowitall, enlighten me. What advantage does Lightroom have that can't all ready be done in Photoshop+Bridge?

 

[Kebabselector]

Bulk Raw non destructive editing/processing, Bulk metadata editing, Library functions, book creation, auto uploads to various websites.

I know some of this is achievable using Photoshop and Bridge, however it takes much longer.

I've recently cancelled my CS6 subscription as most of it's functionality has been replaced by Pixelmator - o.k. it's not Photoshop - but for the limited use I was using CS6 for it was worth it.

If you're happy to use CS or CC then fine, don't assume everyone else is an idiot because we prefer tools that simplify our workflow.

 

[iMikeT]

Bulk Raw non destructive editing/processing, Bulk metadata editing, Library functions, book creation, auto uploads to various websites.

I know some of this is achievable using Photoshop and Bridge, however it takes much longer.

I've recently cancelled my CS6 subscription as most of it's functionality has been replaced by Pixelmator - o.k. it's not Photoshop - but for the limited use I was using CS6 for it was worth it.

If you're happy to use CS or CC then fine, don't assume everyone else is an idiot because we prefer tools that simplify our workflow.

The reason why I assume that there are plenty of users who do not know what they're doing is because it's true, there are statistics that prove this. The other day I saw an APA stat that showed working professional's workflow and get this, a good majority don't bother archiving. There was a stat showing that somewhere around 12% of professionals even bother using a RAID setup to store their work. The vast majority (~60%) use only a single external hard drive in their workflow and probably backup using only DVDs. Is the aforementioned example simple as far as workflow? Yes. I assume that these are the same kind of people who use simple software like Lightroom and if that's the kind of simplicity they're looking for, then it will get back at them in the long term.

 

[Kebabselector]

a good majority don't bother archiving

That probably applies to a large percentage of general computer users as well. I've used computers since the 80's so I'm aware nothing is safe.

The vast majority (~60%) use only a single external hard drive in their workflow and probably backup using only DVDs.

I can well believe that.

Is the aforementioned example simple as far as workflow? Yes. I assume that these are the same kind of people who use simple software like Lightroom and if that's the kind of simplicity they're looking for, then it will get back at them in the long term.

I wouldn't call data storage workflow, users inability to backup is probably lack of technical knowledge. Lightroom for me simplifies repetitive tasks, when it comes to data backups I'll use something that simplifies that also, but at least I know it's done.

 

[iamgalactic]

Guess what, when you work with Fortune 500 clients, they don't need your files. All they wants are things get done and I DO get to tell my studios what I want and how I want them. Welcome to the big league.

Well done. You must be very proud. I'm not going to have pi**ing contest with you about who has the biggest clients.

For the record though, I work with the biggest media companies and publishers in the UK - and guess what? Often, they want the freaking files - Photoshop, After Effects, Illustrator. It happens, and it's a two way thing.

And everyone I work with uses the latest versions of software - because their big enough not to worry about spending money on software. If CS3 is still fine for what you work on, then great. Sounds little league to me though.

 

[Will do good]

Well done. You must be very proud. I'm not going to have pi**ing contest with you about who has the biggest clients.

For the record though, I work with the biggest media companies and publishers in the UK - and guess what? Often, they want the freaking files - Photoshop, After Effects, Illustrator. It happens, and it's a two way thing.

And everyone I work with uses the latest versions of software - because their big enough not to worry about spending money on software. If CS3 is still fine for what you work on, then great. Sounds little league to me though.

Media companies and publisher? not global product companies like burgers and soft drinks?

In fact for large ad agency with 30-40 offices around the global and it's support studios. The last thing we wanted is to to pay Adobe monthly fee for thousands of licenses with no end. No thanks.

 

[iamgalactic]

Media companies and publisher? not global product companies like burgers and soft drinks?

In fact for large ad agency with 30-40 offices around the global and it's support studios. The last thing we wanted is to to pay Adobe monthly fee for thousands of licenses with no end. No thanks.

Media companies like BBC. Publishers like the biggest learning publishers in Europe.

Last motion graphics job we had was AE templates for the Olympics where they needed the files so you can quit being so damned patronising.

You're wrong about clients needing files, and you're wrong about the need for staying up to date with latest versions. I guess if you're just supplying some little posters here and there then it doesn't matter.

 

[morespce54]

Yeah, because HTML5 is suitable for producing 30 minutes to two hours worth of animation?

We are not there yet.

It is the last class I need for my certificate (or the second to last). I know it's not the best for web authoring anymore, but it's still usable for animating in general.

After Effects is much better suited to animation. Flash for 30 min - 2 hr animations? Are you nuts?

Exactly what I was thinking... 2 hours of Flash?
Even for 30 min of playing time, I wouldn't like to be your computer's battery!

...
However, I found out that when I was going back and forth between CS3 and 5, especially in InDesign and Flash, I would run into compatibility issues everytime...

Well, it's Adobe we're talking about here so...

 

[iMikeT]

That probably applies to a large percentage of general computer users as well.

Which is an issue in itself. We're living in 2013 and the average person can't grasp the concept of using a computer properly.

Over the past few months, my parents's computer has had issues and I said we need to reinstall Windows. I told them that we first need to backup and move all their essential files. Well no surprise to me, the only existing copy they have of many things are on the computer's hard drive, much of which are sensitive documents, photos, videos, and music.

Then there was this week in my Photoshop class. I ended up helping the two ladies sitting next to me just get around the operating system most of the time. This is a beginning Photoshop class that I'm taking as a refresher, I know what I need to know for my purposes as I was using CS2+Bridge for the longest time but upgraded to CS6 and thought I should brush up on what's new. So while we're starting this class, not only are we starting with Photoshop from scratch but we're also taking a crash course on getting around a computer. Anyway, both of the aforementioned ladies are in their early-mid 20s and told me that computers are confusing to them, these are the kind of people who had the opportunity to grow up with this stuff like I did!

I'm happy to help anyone who asks but a lot of this stuff is extremely basic. If we're going to live in a technology centered world, basic and even slightly advanced computer skills should be commonplace and even a necessity. It's not enough to be able to type and click a mouse these days which is why I think people knowing their tools is a must and even more of a necessity if someone is going to use creative software to make a living.

I wouldn't call data storage workflow, users inability to backup is probably lack of technical knowledge. Lightroom for me simplifies repetitive tasks, when it comes to data backups I'll use something that simplifies that also, but at least I know it's done.

Therein is where you an I differ. No need for me to get into the technical knowledge again as you know my position on it.

For me, and I'm sure many other power users would agree, workflow takes into account every part of the process from beginning to end. Data storage is a part of the workflow. Before beginning a project, users need to know where their files are going to be stored right? So why wouldn't that be a part of the overall workflow? And if the issue is simplification, many users don't realize that storage mediums like memory cards are the same as your 3.5" hard drive. They can be accessed at the os level and files can be copied and archived here. There is no need to open up a glorified file browser like Lightroom to do this, it's nothing more than novice techniques from equally novice users.

How difficult is it to connect a memory card to a computer, create a new folder on the desktop, open up the memory card (as a drive), and copy the files? From there it's about sending it to the archive and backing up. Anyone who set up a sound workflow to begin with wouldn't need to pay Adobe and buy Lightroom because they can't grasp that concept.

 

[Will do good]

Media companies like BBC. Publishers like the biggest learning publishers in Europe.

Last motion graphics job we had was AE templates for the Olympics where they needed the files so you can quit being so damned patronising.

You're wrong about clients needing files, and you're wrong about the need for staying up to date with latest versions. I guess if you're just supplying some little posters here and there then it doesn't matter.

Biggest in UK? That say it all.

 

[Jessica Lares]

Exactly what I was thinking... 2 hours of Flash?
Even for 30 min of playing time, I wouldn't like to be your computer's battery!

Well, it's Adobe we're talking about here so...

I have rendered 3 minutes, frame by frame, in Maya for 10 hours straight, it was a nightmare. I was surprised the MacBook Pro didn't turn off on me. It got SO LOUD and was scorching hot!

Of course I wouldn't do that in Flash. HTML5 would be even worse though.

After Effects is more emphasized in the digital video courses though, the only time I used it was when I had to put all those Maya rendered out images and make a few changes before I saved it out.

The animation course in my college is more about learning to structure your work with storyboards, learning to use Photoshop, Illustrator, Indesign, and the basics of Flash. And then of course using Maya to render and animate. The smaller certificate anyway, the main one has you do math and writing that focus on liberal arts.

They'd rather us take improvisation, theatre, and dance than a HTML course. They are more beneficial and will help you do better work.

You're learning how to tell stories, and how to put them in art form. HTML5 is cool, but you'd draw it all out and finalize it before even bothering to even start doing it. And at that point, you probably have it in a program already, so why not use that instead?

Like someone else said, it doesn't matter what you do it in, it just has to be in the correct exported format. But I like sticking to Adobe stuff because it's what I know. It would be like going from Maya to Blender.

Oh and a strong portfolio and basic HTML (that is in good taste), is better than a weak portfolio and good HTML.

 

[iamgalactic]

Biggest in UK? That say it all.

Only one of the three clients things I mentioned were UK specific - and even that is a worldwide brand.

Olympics = UK??? Muppet.

Nice work on alienating the global community on MacRumors. And with your fantastic grammar I'm sure you'll go far.

What the hell does geography have to do with clients needing source files???

 

[dazed]

Will this be avail to those of us already using CC?

At the moment all I need is Lightroom and PS so can save quite a bit by downgrading. Anyone know if I would be able to downgrade or do I have to cancel and then rejoin?


Thanks.

 

[Jessica Lares]

Will this be avail to those of us already using CC?

At the moment all I need is Lightroom and PS so can save quite a bit by downgrading. Anyone know if I would be able to downgrade or do I have to cancel and then rejoin?


Thanks.

Give Adobe a call next week and see if they'll downgrade you. Should be okay as long as you're not on contract.