Making things up to support your narrative is really not good form
https://www.marketwatch.com/investing/stock/adbe/financials
Revenue and profit have been increasing strongly YoY
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple's Phil Schiller Talks About Upcoming Photoshop for iPad App at Adobe MAX
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Making things up to support your narrative is really not good form
https://www.marketwatch.com/investing/stock/adbe/financials
Revenue and profit have been increasing strongly YoY
The same could be said for Photoshop. The idea is that the iPads are becoming more powerful and why not have the ability to code on-the-go.
Wasn't making things up. Apologies for not clarifying.
They had been hurting before Creative Cloud which is what I was referring to by "recent years".
A 27" 5K screen still shows more detail than a 12" 2K screen. iOS still doesn't have display color calibration or a true user-accessible file system. These remain fundamental advantages of the Mac for a lot of professionals, even if they are less important to your workflow.
This.
This.
…and this.
We're a long way off from Schiller's wet dream come true.
surprised no one mentioned InDesign. For me to be able to use that on an iPad would be great. My MBP seems so heavy at times...
Thanks. Makes more sense in context.
So then the thrust of your original posts seems to be making a full featured Photoshop on iOS is going to drive additional revenue for Adobe, which I think most people would agree with.
Have you never heard of portable computing? I love photo editing on a 27", and I certainly would have nothing less on my desktop. But if I'm on location, I'm not taking my 27" iMac with me in my day pack. Does that mean I have to wait until I return to the office to do preliminary editing (or even final, if I have to publish before returning home)?
Perhaps your workflow is studio-focused, where you have access to all sorts of hard-to-transport gear. In a sense, your argument is like saying, "I don't shoot on location, because it's hard to carry around rolls of seamless, strobe packs, and the hardware needed to support it all."
Portable computing is about working anywhere, at any time. Sure, you can do your portable computing on a laptop, but tablets are even lighter and more portable. Saving a pound or two in my day pack means I can carry something else of real value - a heavier tripod, another lens... Does it really matter whether your screen is a 13" MacBook Pro or a 12.9" iPad Pro?
And why is your rant about Apple? This is about Adobe making one of its premiere products available on another platform. Not about discontinuing that product on macOS or Windows. Going back to the days of film, it'd be like complaining that Kodak made a particular emulsion previously available only in sheet film available in 35mm as well.
And you know, this really does seem like the whole large format vs. 35mm debates that began in the 1930s and continued well into the 1960s. It's not a matter of whether bigger is better. It's a matter whether bigger is always practical.
Thinking about this, the MacBook vs iPad argument kinda comes down this: the MacBook can adapt to my workflow; but on an iPad I have to adapt to its workflow. As someone once told me: people don't hate channel they hate being changed.
I can do a lot of my normal workflow on an iPad right up until I can't. Then it's game over. For example, Affinity Photo on the desktop and iPad are almost feature complete... except I can't use my Topaz filters on the iPad. This isn't Affinity's fault, but there isn't a workaround for this. Some of the macros I have found come close, but they aren't exact.
For me, the iPad succeeds more than it fails, but I think we are a long ways off from it replacing a lot of macOS-based workflows. Photoshop on the iPad is a start, but if your daily workflow requires Photoshop Actions that don't work on the iPad, or you have an automated routine that makes lot of external calls, the iPad as it is now fails at that task.
While these may be edge cases, it's not an edge case if you are the one doing it on a daily basis. I think this is what people are referring to when they talk about "Pro" workflows.
Originally, you also adapted to your MacBook's workflow. The workflow of chemical photography is wildly different than the workflow for digital.
There are always pros and cons when it comes to hardware and workflows. Say you're an architectural photographer. You might still be working with a view camera so that you can have all the perspective controls that come with that style camera. The digital darkroom (Photoshop, etc.) is capable of manipulations that were impossible in the days of the chemical darkroom. Can you imagine today's journalism if it was still necessary to bring film (16mm motion, or 4x5 or 35mm stills) back to the office for processing?
Tools are constantly evolving. Your ability to have a professional-quality editing app on iPad is a relatively new development (so to speak). If the only thing you're missing is Topaz filters... how much longer before they are available?
Again, this particular topic is about a particular tool that had previously not been available for iPad becoming available. I can't count the number of posts made over the years from photographers saying that iPad can't be a professional tool because Photoshop is not available. Well, that's essentially what Phil is crowing about. That entire argument just went out the window.
Whether any one individuals workflow can adapt to change will always be an issue. That's just the way things are, not just in the world of Apple, but all over.
Knowing Topaz, probably never. Which is why I've been obtaining some Affinity Macros that come close. If Photoshop iOS runs actions that's a good addition. If it can do some of the Photoshop only features Affinity can't do, even better. It's great that Photoshop is coming to iPad, but only if it meets the needs of the user base. We don't know the limitations and won't until the beta at least.
I think my original point got a little lost. I'm a big advocate for the iPad, but the Mac (and Windows) is definitely more flexible. I can find a script do something, or perhaps an open source program, or some weird little utility. The iPad's system doesn't allow for this. Sometimes that's not a problem. Sometimes it's a big problem. I hope Photoshop for iOS eventually does everything the desktop version can do.
The same podcast said you can keep using the classic PSD format and that having no internet is no problem, I think you should give it an other listenAmazingly enough I was just listening today to the Verge Podcast all about this.
Headline, Photoshop comes to the iPad. that sounded fantastic.
It started to go downhill a bit, with all the talk about re-imagining the user interface.
Then went downhill dramatically when asked about the lack of a proper file-system on iPads, and then we went into all the talk about the Adobe cloud and where you files are saved, just cached to the ipad when there is no internet.
that's when I totally lost interest.
I don’t need to be a professional photographer to play around with photoshop or affinity photo or lumafusion. It can still useful to me even if I end up mastering just 10% of its functionality.
With x code, it’s either I use it to create an app, or i don’t. There really isn’t any middle ground for me to justify the time learning it if I am not an app developer.
The subscription complaints are presumably from non-pros about whom Adobe couldn’t care less. Pros who make money with Adobe products find the subscption price trivial, and likely cover the yearly cost after a few hours work on January 1st of each year.
Last edited:
I just had a look at my Windows 7 workstation. I've only got PS CC and Bridge running, but somehow there are 9 Adobe Processes active in the Task Manager.
- Bridge.exe
- CEPHtmlEngine.exe
- CEPHtmlEngine.exe
- CEPHtmlEngine.exe
- AdobeIPCBroker.exe
- Photoshop.exe
- Adobe Spaces helper.exe
- Adobe Spaces helper.exe
- Adobe Spaces helper.exe
I'd have thought you need to be a professional photographer to to justify the cost of Photoshop - isn't it really expensive? There are plenty good, cheap image editing apps for casual users (I love Pixelmator, personally).
My world is about production actually getting things done, not fantasizing - you know reality - hours of actual production time to see what actually works and what is nothing more than a sales pitch to millennials.
As stated the iPad doesn't even have hdmi input, SD card slots or really an easy way to connect a camera to transfer a file from a professional camera onto the iPad. Dongles and multiple connection points in the field suck!
Are you using an iPad in a professional environment to deal with large Raw files? Are you using the iPad as a recorder to monitor and record a Pro Res Raw video file? Or is photoshop just a tool to make your selfie look like a cat?
I have watched millennials work on the tiny laptop screens all thinking they're awesome, but I know and can see their work is sloppy because monitor size matters for double checking in the visual arts.
Jesus what a snob.
[doublepost=1539769154][/doublepost]The way I see it this is great news.
I’m a professional photographer. I do not work from the iPad, nor do I think Photoshop alone would be enough to bring me to the iPad. However there is a lot good in this.
- Photoshop in my opinion is in desperate need of a rewrite. Adobe setting out to build real Photoshop from the ground up hopefully means they follow a lot of the iOS protocols and frameworks. Things like metal for example. It also hopefully means they clean up some of the apps weirder bits.
- Being on iOS also prevents some of Adobe’s worst tendencies. Nothing I hate more than opening my Documents folder on my Mac and seeing a folder called Adobe with a sub folder called with some weird name. All of which seems to do nothing, but if you delete it it will just return in a day or two. I wish they would get Photoshop into the Mac App Store just so I could maybe get the app without all the other crap Adobe installs in the background.
- Also this is could actually good for the Mac because it is inevitable that the Mac will eventually go to Apple developed processors and then there is a version of PS ready to go when that happens.
So, I kinda see where the poster is coming from. There are a lot of Photoshop workflows that are built around repetitive tasks and eeking seconds out of a process because those things add up. I'm not sure iPad Photoshop is going to address those cases, at least not at first.
A marketing chief talking about creative vision. The man probably has never waited 12 hours for a 3D rendering to finish. Or simply attempted to drag an element across the screen in a 300 layer hi-res Photoshop file.
Hence the fascination with little toys. A creative vision, first an foremost would be directed forward and not backwards to see what we can do with toys that by their own nature are limited, but how we can push the envelope and can create content that has gone where no content has gone before. And for that, we need computing power and serious workstations. As it is, I think Apple has lost all creative vision.
Hence the fascination with little toys. A creative vision, first an foremost would be directed forward and not backwards to see what we can do with toys that by their own nature are limited, but how we can push the envelope and can create content that has gone where no content has gone before. And for that, we need computing power and serious workstations. As it is, I think Apple has lost all creative vision.