Photoshop Express Beta

[ChrisA]

My buddy Terry White put it perspective for me. He said, “Imagine a kid going to his parents and saying “I need a hundred bucks to buy Elements to fix the photos I’m putting on my “MySpace” page.” Now you know why Adobe created Express, and who it’s made for."

It's not even good enough for that. As a test I just uploaded some photos of some stuff I'm going to sell on eBay. I shot them using a towel as a background. I figured I'd remove the towel and back the background look totally white. This is not hard using even an old version of PS Elements. It is impossible using this web based thing.

To put this another way, no one who has iPhoto will want this. iPhoto is a much more capable photo editor. So as an editor it is of no use to anyone who owns a recent Mac, as they all came with iPhoto.

But now the good news: 2GB of free space for hosting images on the web.
I think this was intended to compete to Google's Picasa

 

[ChrisA]

I didnt know flash was that powerful. Its cool but totally not what I was expecting. This is lightroom express, it has absolutely nothing to do with photoshop. I thought it would let you make stuff from scratch rather than just edit photos.

You can't even edit photos, all you can do is make gross adjustments. There are no selection tools.

 

[Heil68]

Ack, something is majorly messed up over here.

I upgraded Firefox I think yesterday 2.0.0.13 - it doesn't seem right. It has crashed like four times this morning. ugh.

Well thank you all for replying. Good to know it isn't a problem with the site, just me!

Probably one of my many FF extensions!

hmmm, works fine for me on FireFox..

 

[Poll Smoker]

Ha ha! I find it ironic that they have a picture of a person texting on an iPhone, whilst most of you whine about no iPhone support.

I find it ironic that you don't know the meaning of "ironic".

Whilst?

 

[Abstract]

To put this another way, no one who has iPhoto will want this. iPhoto is a much more capable photo editor. So as an editor it is of no use to anyone who owns a recent Mac, as they all came with iPhoto.

No, it does have better editing, IMO. It can do things that iPhoto can't, or at least the previous iPhoto version can't do. I got my MacBook last June (2007).

Looks like a dumbed down version of editing features in Lightroom.

 

[iDmitry]

Ok, I know there are a lot of hard critics here but come on, lets take a look behind the not-so-professional editor. Yes, I agree that the editor is a simple one but what you have to understand is that this website is a beta, and it's FREE. This means that maybe after a little time the photoshop people willg et back info of the users telling them what they like or vice-versa and they will make it better. I personally like what they have done, IMO its better than Googles' Picasa. So before anyone jumps to any conclusions, take some time to really look at EVERYTHING that the website has to offer, and then write a review on these boards telling your honest opinion, but keeping in mind that this isn't designed for the professional photographer.

 

[3247]

Doesn't this also make us liable for damages if we don't get a model release? If they take a picture I took and sell it to coke and coke puts it in an ad, then the person in the picture can sue me. That's my understanding. I'm going to pass and suggest everyone do the same until it is cleared up by Adobe's lawyers.

The person can also sue Adobe. If you didn't get a license, you can't give Adobe a license.

If they only show it on their photo gallery, the notice-and-takedown procedure from the DMCA applies. However, if they really sell it, that hosters' privilege no longer applies.

"...This afternoon I got the following note from the Photoshop Express team:

We've heard your concerns about the terms of service for Photoshop Express beta. We reviewed the terms in context of your comments - and we agree that it currently implies things we would never do with the content. Therefore, our legal team is making it a priority to post revised terms that are more appropriate for Photoshop Express users. We will alert you once we have posted new terms. Thank you for your feedback on Photoshop Express beta and we appreciate your input.

I'll post an update when I know more."

I wonder why US lawyers don't seem to be able to create reasonable terms the first time.

That's not the first time lawyers make terms and conditions that cover their client's ass with several layers of safety nets but alienate their client's customers at the same time.

 

[Kar98]

You might want to reverse that list. It is primarily a smartphone/pda, then a great ipod, and then a mediocre phone. And with the 2.0 system, it's going to pretty much be the enterprise phone to beat.

Sorry, I've been using PDAs since the original Palm Pilot, and the iPhone is not a PDA. At the very least, a PDA would allow you to make and alter entries on the handheld device and sync them to your desktop computer.

 

[eastcoastsurfer]

Horrible idea.
Web applications = not accessible if no internet access and slow. Severs go? Bye-bye.

Arn already touched on it, but this is a very short sighted view. If you edit locally you have much higher chance of losing *your* HD than Adobe does at losing their entire server farm. Even if you backup, a fire could wipe out your entire collection. Putting items online, especially with a company like Adobe or Google means you will most likely *never* lose them.

 

[Kar98]

Putting items online, especially with a company like Adobe or Google means you will most likely *never* lose them.

Until Adobe, Google (or in my case the latter's sub Youtube) decides to take some ******** IP complaint seriously and wipes out your entire collection.

 

[Bubba Satori]

i hope is fails miserably for adobe

Your grammar and punctuation fails spectacularly. I know five year olds that can express themselves better than that.

 

[princealfie]

You might want to reverse that list. It is primarily a smartphone/pda, then a great ipod, and then a mediocre phone. And with the 2.0 system, it's going to pretty much be the enterprise phone to beat.

okay but iphone must get photoshop!!! what's the point of having the camera if you can't edit them on the fly?

 

[princealfie]

Ok, I know there are a lot of hard critics here but come on, lets take a look behind the not-so-professional editor. Yes, I agree that the editor is a simple one but what you have to understand is that this website is a beta, and it's FREE. This means that maybe after a little time the photoshop people willg et back info of the users telling them what they like or vice-versa and they will make it better. I personally like what they have done, IMO its better than Googles' Picasa. So before anyone jumps to any conclusions, take some time to really look at EVERYTHING that the website has to offer, and then write a review on these boards telling your honest opinion, but keeping in mind that this isn't designed for the professional photographer.

That's put it this way... the famous photog Stephen Shore only uses iPhoto and no one seems to complain about the lack of pro software... really, pro software is for those who want to waste time tweaking pictures into oblivion while failing to shoot better pictures.

Use the camera and the head, not the puter.

 

[7on]

Sorry, I've been using PDAs since the original Palm Pilot, and the iPhone is not a PDA. At the very least, a PDA would allow you to make and alter entries on the handheld device and sync them to your desktop computer.

The iPhone has a calendar and address book. As far as I know, they sync to your computer. Also syncing is not a prerequisite for a personal digital assistant. I think all it needs to be is A)digital b)personal and c)an assistant

 

[shamino]

... if a client sees an image of yours and wants to acquire exclusive usage rights from you. If you had that image in this service at one time or another you will legally not be able to grant your client the requested exclusive rights because you already granted a license to Adobe...

Doesn't this also make us liable for damages if we don't get a model release? If they take a picture I took and sell it to coke and coke puts it in an ad, then the person in the picture can sue me. That's my understanding. I'm going to pass and suggest everyone do the same until it is cleared up by Adobe's lawyers.

I would argue that nobody in his right mind would use a free web-based service for business purposes. No matter what the license terms are, it sounds like a recipe for disaster.

If you're taking/processing images for a living, then buy a powerful-enough computer and the software to do your job. The last thing you want to do is place your business at the mercy of a large faceless corporation that couldn't care less about you.

This is why I despise things like Windows' "Genuine Advantage". Even if the system is not abused, I would never want to give Microsoft (or anyone else) the ability to flip a switch and shutdown all my computers. Photoshop Express is even worse - not only can they shut it/you down without notice, they also have possession of your documents.

I wonder why US lawyers don't seem to be able to create reasonable terms the first time.

That's not the first time lawyers make terms and conditions that cover their client's ass with several layers of safety nets but alienate their client's customers at the same time.

They could make reasonable licenses up front, but they usually have little incentive to do so.

They aren't being paid by their clients' customers, so they have no reason to protect the rights of those customers, unless their client explicitly asks them to.

These contracts usually also have a clause along the lines of "if any term is illegal or unenforceable, it doesn't invalidate any other terms". This is because they like to "shutgun" as many restrictions as they can. It will scare customers who don't know the law into obedience, and (if the terms aren't challenged) they set precedent for even more restrictive terms in the future.

Adobe certainly won't care unless it costs them customers. And who is going to stop using Creative Suite because of a clause in a different product's license?

 

[Nym]

I personally think the interface is very intuitive and well built. I took the Test Drive and I immediately went to all the places I wanted to go and I had no problem whatsoever in editing an image, reverting to the original and all the other stuff.

This is a Beta app, if people would just take it easy on Adobe we could actually start enjoying these nice apps without spending our time nitpicking on what they "didn't" deliver in the Beta version. IMO, it's ridiculous the things people say to complain over and over about everything.

Seriously, and the "it doesn't work on the iPhone" argument? Really? Some people just crack me up. The iPhone is one of the few Smartphones which doesn't support Flash and instead of blaming it on Apple we turn to Adobe for using their own technology which has an installed user base of over 90%... it doesn't make sense in my personal view. And not that I'm one of those guys who desperately whines about the iPhone not having Flash support but in this case specifically, I'm not blaming Adobe too.

 

[princealfie]

I personally think the interface is very intuitive and well built. I took the Test Drive and I immediately went to all the places I wanted to go and I had no problem whatsoever in editing an image, reverting to the original and all the other stuff.

This is a Beta app, if people would just take it easy on Adobe we could actually start enjoying these nice apps without spending our time nitpicking on what they "didn't" deliver in the Beta version. IMO, it's ridiculous the things people say to complain over and over about everything.

Seriously, and the "it doesn't work on the iPhone" argument? Really? Some people just crack me up. The iPhone is one of the few Smartphones which doesn't support Flash and instead of blaming it on Apple we turn to Adobe for using their own technology which has an installed user base of over 90%... it doesn't make sense in my personal view. And not that I'm one of those guys who desperately whines about the iPhone not having Flash support but in this case specifically, I'm not blaming Adobe too.

yes but isn't the point of a beta version to complain so much that Adobe is forced to improve it for us users?

 

[jettredmont]

This is a Beta app, if people would just take it easy on Adobe we could actually start enjoying these nice apps without spending our time nitpicking on what they "didn't" deliver in the Beta version. IMO, it's ridiculous the things people say to complain over and over about everything.

I find it silly how some people feel they are the persecuted minority now that, what, four people here have said this isn't a big deal? If you want an effluent praise echo chamber, go reread the first two pages of comments. On the first page, there is the obligatory "this doesn't work on my iPhone!" post (which comes up with just about everything), then one legitimate negative comment. That one negative comment is immediately put down by Arn in the next post. The second page is about 90% positive, but a few more negative posts.

 

[jettredmont]

No, it does have better editing, IMO. It can do things that iPhoto can't, or at least the previous iPhoto version can't do. I got my MacBook last June (2007).

Like what? I'm not a regular user of iPhoto (I'm over on Aperture), but all the tools here seem certainly of the same caliper and scope as those offered by iPhoto.

And, no, it is absolutely nowhere near a tool like Lightroom or Aperture. Obviously, I wouldn't expect such from a free online app.

 

[jettredmont]

Scott Kelby's company Kelby Training have already made online tutorials for Photoshop Express, so he must have known about it for a fair while. This is how he describes it on his blog...

"...Although Photoshop Express does use some Photoshop technology, it’s designed to be a totally different experience (after all, it’s free), and it’s aimed at a totally different audience (18 to 22 year-old MySpace and Facebook users, who aren’t going to spend $600 to $900 to buy Photoshop CS3, or even $99 to buy Elements).

As has been previously said, the "right" answer is that they can use iPhoto or the Windows toy picture editor equivalent. That is what this competes with, not Photoshop Elements or the like. This is a really basic photo library plus super-basic whole-photo effects (which, IMHO, iPhoto seems to do more completely and better).

You get Elements if you want regional effects and pixel editing. This will not do any such thing for you.

 

[QuarterSwede]

Besides it running dog slow in Safari (thanks to Flash running like garbage in OS X) it's cute. Definitely not as powerful as iPhoto but you get a lot for a well designed and thought out free web app. And who can argue with 2GB of free, heavily legalized (for lack of a better word) web space?

For me I'll stick with editing in iPhoto and uploading to my SmugMug account.

 

[Nym]

yes but isn't the point of a beta version to complain so much that Adobe is forced to improve it for us users?

Yes, of course! Adobe should have feedback from it's users (not that they will be looking for it at MR Forums), however, there are two ways to criticize something: One is constructive, the other is not. I'm just saying that people should criticize what is bad but also have the vision to perceive the things that they did well.

And I'm not saying everyone here does it, but.. just look at the thread's rating

I find it silly how some people feel they are the persecuted minority now that, what, four people here have said this isn't a big deal? If you want an effluent praise echo chamber, go reread the first two pages of comments. On the first page, there is the obligatory "this doesn't work on my iPhone!" post (which comes up with just about everything), then one legitimate negative comment. That one negative comment is immediately put down by Arn in the next post. The second page is about 90% positive, but a few more negative posts.

The same as above. Of course not everyone does it, but, there are still reasons enough for me to give my POV regarding the complaints about this web-app not working on the iPhone. Like it's Adobe's fault...

Adobe has already made a lot of crappy decisions over the years but, sometimes I feel that we should also cut them a little slack and recognize when they do something good. Same with every other brand around.

And for the record, I agree, Arn's answer was spot-on, exactly what I was thinking when I read the negative post.

 

[ChrisA]

Like what? I'm not a regular user of iPhoto (I'm over on Aperture), but all the tools here seem certainly of the same caliper and scope as those offered by iPhoto.

Technically he's right. If you compare "express" to an older version of iPhoto then you find express has a "retouch tool" that older iPhoto versons lacked. It works like Photoshop's "spot healing" brush. So I'll re-state it this way, if you have iPhoto 08 your don't need "Express".

 

[tcoleman]

Two things. First of all, I can do most of the simple editing that I need to do in iPhoto. I can't really see me using Photoshop Express for anything. Secondly, it doesn't integrate with Flickr, so it is also not useful for me in that respect.

 

[stadidas]

Last time I checked, iPhoto wasn't free.