PDA

View Full Version : Whats the verdict on Adobe CC?



photonsoup
20-Feb-2015, 18:16
There were lots of comments about this when it first came out. I'd like to hear thoughts about it from people who have actually used it.
Upgrading to new computer soon and haven't decided if I should change, or reinstall Photoshop CS4 and Lightroom 2.
Here in the Montana Sticks, internet speed is pretty slow, (when it works) so I would hate to have to wait while working on things.
Is CC actually stored on your machine?
If so can you run the program without connection the net?
Anything else I should know about?
I tried to open some RAW files from a newer Cannon camera and found that CS4 didn't have the right magic ingredients for that. Am I correct in the assumption that if I get a newer digital camera I will have to upgrade, or are there ways around this? I currently have a Nikon D300 and a couple of D70s's
thanks
Bryan

Peter De Smidt
20-Feb-2015, 18:32
Bryan, I use CC most days. It's how I earn the majority of my living. You don't need to be online to use it. Everything is stored on your system, just as before. I don't know how far your older programs can be updated, but make sure you use the newest camera raw and Lightroom updates for them. With newer cameras, there might be workarounds for using with the older programs, such as using a program to produce dng files, and then using Lightroom or camera raw to open those. The camera/lens specific features won't be there, but that shouldn't be a big deal. For me, using CC is worth it, but it all depends upon what type of things you do.

Jac@stafford.net
20-Feb-2015, 19:08
Does CC call home periodically to check if our subscription is current?
And if it does, and we cannot connect are we screwed?
.

Bill McMannis
20-Feb-2015, 19:58
Bryan, I use CC most days. It's how I earn the majority of my living. You don't need to be online to use it. Everything is stored on your system, just as before. I don't know how far your older programs can be updated, but make sure you use the newest camera raw and Lightroom updates for them. With newer cameras, there might be workarounds for using with the older programs, such as using a program to produce dng files, and then using Lightroom or camera raw to open those. The camera/lens specific features won't be there, but that shouldn't be a big deal. For me, using CC is worth it, but it all depends upon what type of things you do.

Agree 100%. I have the bargain version with Lightroom and Photoshop. The wife has the full-blown version as she uses InDesign and Illustrator in addition to PS. IMO, both subscriptions are bargains.

Preston
20-Feb-2015, 20:17
Here's the listing of all cameras that the Camera Plug-in (versions 1.0 through 8.7) supports.

Adobe Camera RAW Plugin Versions and Supported Cameras (http://helpx.adobe.com/creative-suite/kb/camera-raw-plug-supported-cameras.html)

For example, for the D-300, the minimum version of ACR is 4.3, and the Lightroom minimum version is 1.3.1.

--P

Jim Andrada
20-Feb-2015, 21:39
To the best of my knowledge it calls home periodically and if a month or so goes by without being able to connect you're screwed - not sure how often one can't connect for a whole month though. Hasn't been a real problem at all. (I did have a period when my internet service crapped out for a few days so I stuck a USB Wifi adapter in the machine and tethered to my iPhone. Worked OK for critical stuff like e-mail and Adobe never complained.

Randy Moe
20-Feb-2015, 22:14
I am always connected the web, twice down in 10 years. Use the $10 CC version daily and love it.

I would not want to go back to earlier editions of PS or LR. I have used PS since 1996 and paid for updates for many years at great expense. CC is a bargain compared to the past.

I see PS is celebrating 25 years. http://blogs.adobe.com/photoshopdotcom/2015/02/celebrating-25-years-of-photoshop.html

Each improvement has made PS better, much better, never worse.

At work I had to use the phone to get Adobe activated, really not a big deal. I had no Internet there until I hacked in...

Bruce Watson
21-Feb-2015, 08:49
There were lots of comments about this when it first came out. I'd like to hear thoughts about it from people who have actually used it.

Can't help you there. I'm not interested in renting software. Just not going there. But my copy of Photoshop CS6 still works just fine.

Robert Brummitt
21-Feb-2015, 09:47
I'm not letting any business attach itself to my credit card. Its just not smart. Had one photo friend find out Adobe billed him $600 and he's trying to get it back. I'm taking a Lightroom class and the instructor said if Adobe makes Lightroom 6 subscription only he's out. He says that On1 and another British software company are poised to take people who don't want to use the cloud or subscription software. He showed us the Bata of the one and it looks very much like Photoshop with minor differences. I can hear the law suits a comin'!

Moopheus
21-Feb-2015, 10:11
Can't help you there. I'm not interested in renting software. Just not going there. But my copy of Photoshop CS6 still works just fine.

Me too. But I was able to get it at edu discount, so it was vastly cheaper. I don't upgrade unless I really have to.

I'm keeping an eye on Affinity Photo (https://affinity.serif.com/en-gb/photo/?source=USwebgains&siteid=73669&IsoCode=US&culture=en&&MC=WBGSER02) as a possible replacement--the beta looks promising, already has most of what I need. Will be interesting to see what the final product is like.

toyotadesigner
21-Feb-2015, 14:02
A great competitor for PS is around the corner: Affinity Photo. The beta is already fantastic. Doesn't eat or waste RAM. No need for PS anymore. Oh, wait, the price is less than 50 US$ - and it is YOUR product, not connected to a cloud or credit card.

Another 48/16 bit image editor is PhotoLine. 64 bit app, Windows and OS X. Small, fast, stable, 59 Euro for the download. Runs with PS plug-ins. Doesn't waste or eat RAM.

Randy Moe
21-Feb-2015, 14:22
Use Gimp, why pay at all?

:)

Peter De Smidt
21-Feb-2015, 14:24
Affinity is Mac only, a non-starter for many of us.

toyotadesigner
21-Feb-2015, 14:33
Gimp is 24/8bit only. If you want 48/16bit, you have Affinity and Photoline for small money.

Randy Moe
21-Feb-2015, 16:01
I like I can use CC on both Mac and Win simultaneously, 2 installs allowed.

Robert Brummitt
21-Feb-2015, 17:33
The Affinity software is what I was looking at. It seems like a Photoshop program. I'm more interested in a Lightroom replacement if that goes to the cloud and that's where on1 may come in.

Kirk Gittings
21-Feb-2015, 18:17
I had many doubts and voiced them. LR and PS CC works like a charm. Somebody comes out with something better I'll dump it but until then it fills the bill in spades,

esearing
21-Feb-2015, 18:22
I've started using Lightroom 5 for most adjustments out of the camera. Dropped the subscriptions for the full Adobe package because I wasn't using most of the products any more. I get by with Lightroom, Photoshop CS6 and dreamweaver CS4. Just downloaded the Affinity Photo beta and found it to be very intuitive. A decent replacement for Lightroom, but not the full functions of photoshop. So looks like Adobe gets my 9.99 a month for the next year. there are just some things that require layers.

I use Coldfusion at work, and have gotten spoiled by the ease of developing with it. I liked the macromedia products before adobe bought them. I used to write my own games in flash and did all sorts of neat things with photographs, objects, and text. But the subscription model does not fit my budget any longer.

GIMP never really worked for me. and the Mac drawing tools are just ok.

sanking
21-Feb-2015, 19:00
.......
Just downloaded the Affinity Photo beta and found it to be very intuitive. A decent replacement for Lightroom, but not the full functions of photoshop. So looks like Adobe gets my 9.99 a month for the next year. there are just some things that require layers.
.....
GIMP never really worked for me. and the Mac drawing tools are just ok.

That is my assessment also, Affinity seems OK as a replacement for Lightroom but it lacks many of the essential editing features I use in Photoshop.

I have owned every other upgrade of Photoshop since the early 90s, up to CS5. I considered outright purchase of CS6, but the current education pricing of CC at $9.99 a month seems a better deal to me than CS6 at $299. I don't really understand concerns about the credit card issue, the charge to me was for one year, non-recurring unless an extension of the contract is approved.

Sandy

jp
21-Feb-2015, 19:17
I used to use think highly of Gimp and still think well of it for the price and open source goodness. But photoshop CC runs circles around gimp for performance. And it handles 48 bit images. Haven't tried Affinity yet.

Randy Moe
21-Feb-2015, 19:53
I used to use think highly of Gimp and still think well of it for the price and open source goodness. But photoshop CC runs circles around gimp for performance. And it handles 48 bit images. Haven't tried Affinity yet.

I was joking about Gimp. It's a complete waste of time. FOR ME! ymmv

Moopheus
22-Feb-2015, 07:29
Gimp is 24/8bit only. If you want 48/16bit, you have Affinity and Photoline for small money.

Also Gimp doesn't do CMYK, essential for prepress. They've made some headway, but they've been promising these features _forever_ and haven't been able to do it. N

Lenny Eiger
22-Feb-2015, 13:27
A great competitor for PS is around the corner: Affinity Photo. The beta is already fantastic. Doesn't eat or waste RAM. No need for PS anymore. Oh, wait, the price is less than 50 US$ - and it is YOUR product, not connected to a cloud or credit card.

Another 48/16 bit image editor is PhotoLine. 64 bit app, Windows and OS X. Small, fast, stable, 59 Euro for the download. Runs with PS plug-ins. Doesn't waste or eat RAM.

The reason I use PhotoShop is that I can select in a number of ways, paint the selection with a brush, etc., and apply a mask to an adjustment layer.

Do you know if these programs allow one to do this?

I went and looked at their respective sites but didn't see this info...

Thanks,

Lenny

Armin Seeholzer
22-Feb-2015, 14:16
Can't help you there. I'm not interested in renting software. Just not going there. But my copy of Photoshop CS6 still works just fine.

Same for me I really hope for an alternate to it!!!

Cheers Armin

Randy Moe
22-Feb-2015, 14:26
I doubt anybody will make a better photo manipulator than PS, it's way deep and has 25 years head start.

Maybe next century.

Of course many of us don't really need it and lesser programs work fine for most.

Like Lenny says PS masking is in a class by itself.

Nobody has to buy or rent anything...

toyotadesigner
22-Feb-2015, 14:41
The reason I use PhotoShop is that I can select in a number of ways, paint the selection with a brush, etc., and apply a mask to an adjustment layer.

Do you know if these programs allow one to do this?


Yes, it does, and a lot more, with unlimited layers. Watch the demo videos:

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=affinity+photo&spfreload=10

towolf
22-Feb-2015, 16:38
Also Gimp doesn't do CMYK, essential for prepress. They've made some headway, but they've been promising these features _forever_ and haven't been able to do it. N

Personally Iíve never ever had the need to go into CMYK. Iím not an offset printer.

And the upcoming Gimp, which can be used already today, has 16-bit, 32-bit, 64-bit in integer or float format with gamma or linear. I can happily go from scan to decently "developed" final image in Gimp. Its curves tool is useful, and its 'unsharp mask' is mathematically correct. And their resampling algorithms are performed in linear color space, which wasnít the case in Photoshop for a long time and lead to bad results.

That said, whenever I get the chance I prefer to sit at a Windows computer with Photoshop because the ACR workflow with 16-bit TIFFs from Vuescan is just so much more streamlined. In Gimp it always has to process the full res image and bake the changes in.

Iíd rather invest money in hardware photo equipment than software, if I had any money. Iíll leave the software finesse to the ephemeral world of digital photography. Myself, I barely need curves, resample, sharpen and masks.

Moopheus
23-Feb-2015, 09:31
I doubt anybody will make a better photo manipulator than PS, it's way deep and has 25 years head start.



25 years is a long time for an application to remain relevant, but there's no guarantee that will go forever. After all corporate management can doom a product as quickly as technological change. See also: Quark XPress.

jp
23-Feb-2015, 09:52
25 years is a long time for an application to remain relevant, but there's no guarantee that will go forever. After all corporate management can doom a product as quickly as technological change. See also: Quark XPress.

I miss Pagemaker too. Quark was, best I could tell, for the newspaper business, which has been in a very long slide down. I'm sure it's sales dried right up at the start of the newspaper decline. Coreldraw is still around which I like but have little use for at the moment. Many *nix utilities and editor remain after at least 25 years with cult status, but they are free and impossible to kill.

fishbulb
23-Feb-2015, 09:55
Is CC actually stored on your machine?

Yes


If so can you run the program without connection the net?

Yes, but not forever.


Anything else I should know about?

You will need a modern computer to run Photoshop CC, but it sounds like you've got that


I tried to open some RAW files from a newer Cannon camera and found that CS4 didn't have the right magic ingredients for that. Am I correct in the assumption that if I get a newer digital camera I will have to upgrade, or are there ways around this?

Yes, that is how Adobe drives sales of new software. They only include support for new camera raw files, new lens correction profiles, and support for new software features (such as content-aware fill or camera shake correction) in the latest versions of the software. So if you upgrade your camera, or lenses, or just want the latest and greatest features, you have to upgrade.


Does CC call home periodically to check if our subscription is current?

Yes



And if it does, and we cannot connect are we screwed?
.

You will need to be online when you install and license your software. If you have an annual membership, you’ll be asked to connect to the web to validate your software licenses every 30 days. However, you’ll be able to use products for 99 days even if you’re offline.


I would not want to go back to earlier editions of PS or LR

Me either. I can't believe the first poster is still on Lightroom 2 and CS4. Onward and upward!

Preston
23-Feb-2015, 12:37
Yes, that is how Adobe drives sales of new software. They only include support for new camera raw files, new lens correction profiles, and support for new software features (such as content-aware fill or camera shake correction) in the latest versions of the software. So if you upgrade your camera, or lenses, or just want the latest and greatest features, you have to upgrade.

This is partly true. Adobe does provide updates to the ACR plugin for newer cameras in later versions of Photoshop for older versions. I have CS 6 and I receive ACR updates, but no new features for Photoshop itself. Please see this link (http://helpx.adobe.com/creative-suite/kb/camera-raw-plug-supported-cameras.html).

--P

Kirk Gittings
23-Feb-2015, 16:10
But at some point current ACR itself will not still be compatible with with CS6 I believe so eventually they will cut you off. Then you will have issues if you buy a new camera.

photonsoup
23-Feb-2015, 17:15
If I'm understanding correctly, No one has yet said that they actually tried CC and did not like it or canceled their subscription.

So the people that use it, like it. Or at the very least say that nothing else yet meets their needs.

None of the people in favor of other programs have used CC? Or did I miss something?

If this is correct it seems kind of a no brainer to me.

Thank you all for your input.

Randy Moe
23-Feb-2015, 17:30
If I'm understanding correctly, No one has yet said that they actually tried CC and did not like it or canceled their subscription.

So the people that use it, like it. Or at the very least say that nothing else yet meets their needs.

None of the people in favor of other programs have used CC? Or did I miss something?

If this is correct it seems kind of a no brainer to me.

Thank you all for your input.

I think you are correct. We that use CC like it and the rest don't. Simple really.

Greg Miller
23-Feb-2015, 18:00
I used to stay current with Photoshop (mostly because I teach Photoshop). But I really don't want to be renting software. So I decided to stick with CS6 until there is a compelling reason to go to CC. My primary digital cameras are a D810 and D800E and I don't expect to replace them anytime soon. They are so good I can't foresee any new features that would cause me to want to upgrade enough to have to pay $10/month for the rest of my photography life. Windows 8 reaches end of life in 2023 and I expect CS6 to run on Windows 10. So no worries about RAW conversion or not bring able to have current computer that CS6 will run on. And I haven't seen any CC features that I would really take advantage of.

I processed over 8,000 photos last year for my current book that will be released later this year. Never once did I find myself wishing I had a CC feature. So where Adobe once got $200 or $300 every 1.5 years, they have not and will not get any anytime soon. The product is so mature the new features just aren't that compelling - just like Microsoft could have stopped updating Word ten years ago.

If I were in a position of starting out with Photoshop, I think I would find a friend who switched to CC and buy their PS6 install CD and license from them.

fishbulb
23-Feb-2015, 19:03
If I'm understanding correctly, No one has yet said that they actually tried CC and did not like it or canceled their subscription.

So the people that use it, like it. Or at the very least say that nothing else yet meets their needs.

My opinion:

I've used Light room + Photoshop since LR 2.0 and Photoshop + Bridge before that. Been using Photoshop since v7, probably about 10 or 15 years ago.

In the interim I've tried Paintshop Pro, The Gimp (which is great considering it's free), Apple Aperture + iPhoto, the Nikon programs, and probably some others that I'm forgetting. Nothing come close to Adobe products. Yes they aren't perfect. Yes they will suck down your computer's ram and processing power like a frat boy sucking down beers. Yes adobe bungled the Creative Suite -> Creative Cloud launch.

But, it's still the best software for photography hands down. Creative Cloud version of Photoshop + Lightroom is $10 a month. This used to cost about $1000 every couple years when new CS versions came out. Now, you're paying $120/yr instead of maybe double to quadruple that (depending on how often you upgrade). It's not a bad deal these days, really.

Greg Miller
23-Feb-2015, 19:25
Creative Cloud version of Photoshop + Lightroom is $10 a month. This used to cost about $1000 every couple years when new CS versions came out. Now, you're paying $120/yr instead of maybe double to quadruple that (depending on how often you upgrade). It's not a bad deal these days, really.

Let's look at correct numbers. I paid $221.60 for CS6 upgrade in 2012. I know I paid extra to get the CD but I don't know how much. But that would be $12/mo. if I upgraded every 18 months. Or $6/month if upgraded every other version, which is what many people did (and is where I am at since I am still using and felling no pain nor envy). The biggest difference is that with the purchase you would not lose access to your image files. With CC, if you stop paying, you no longer have software to access your .psd files. You want to make a print? Too bad. You want to make a jpg for a web site? Too bad. How confident is anyone that when they retire they can continue to pay the monthly fee? Doctor bills, prescription medicine, hospital bills,... $10/month assuming it stays that low, might be a hard nut to pay.

Would you rather pay $120 a month to own a car or $100 a month to lease? At least with a car you have the option.

Kirk Gittings
23-Feb-2015, 19:47
Gimp can open PSD files and probably others too. Why assume that sometime in the future only PS will be able to utilize PSD files when it is not even true now? If I were to make a guess I would think there would be more in the future. Look, right now IMHO CC LR and PS is really a no brainer if one expects to be working files with any camera vaguely new at any given time and I personally will for the foreseeable future. I'd love to see real competition to PS and LR-not just some lame alternative that only an avowed Adobe hater could love.

Greg Miller
23-Feb-2015, 20:10
Gimp can open PSD files and probably others too. Why assume that sometime in the future only PS will be able to utilize PSD files when it is not even true now? If I were to make a guess I would think there would be more in the future. Look, right now IMHO CC LR and PS is really a no brainer if one expects to be working files with any camera vaguely new at any given time and I personally will for the foreseeable future. I'd love to see real competition to PS and LR-not just some lame alternative that only an avowed Adobe hater could love.

OK. I will change my statement to say that if you want to work with your .psd file, you;ll have to use some lame alternative. Still not a situation that I want to be in.

Randy Moe
23-Feb-2015, 20:39
Obviously this is a ridiculous discussion.

Users and abusers.

dasBlute
23-Feb-2015, 21:06
Comparing CC to the older methods [buy every two years, etc], does not make sense to me.

You get the entire suit [yeah, with things you don't want/need.... until you do], at lower entry cost.
Never thought I'd edit a PDF, till I did, and found the ability useful. The lower entrance bar will also
bring more people into the Adobe market. Younger people.

Myself, I use curves, the occasional layer, and some toning, i.e. no 'power' user.
But I think it's a smart move on their part, and I like the product.

-Tim

fishbulb
23-Feb-2015, 22:28
Let's look at correct numbers. I paid $221.60 for CS6 upgrade in 2012. I know I paid extra to get the CD but I don't know how much. But that would be $12/mo.

Ah but that's the upgrade price. You conveniently ignore the fact that at some point everyone has to buy the full version before they can just buy upgrades. The full price of just Photoshop CS 6 (not the full suite of other applications) was $699 and for PS Extended it was $999. Then you've got to buy Lightroom 5 which was $149 (or $79 for the upgrade from LR 4, which was $300 new). So if you had never bought PS + LR before that's $848. Even if you never upgrade after that, amortizing it out that's 84 months, or seven years, to pay you back at $10 a month.

The $10 a month price for both PS + LR is a screaming deal by comparison. Plus, there is no large lump payment at the beginning of using the software, and upgrades are free. This is the direction all software is going in the future because it supplies he company with a more predictable, steady revenue stream instead of a big lump every few years. Microsoft and Apple are doing the same the as Adobe.

But, no one is making anyone use it. GIMP works fine for what it is, and you can organize your images with Light zone, Raw therapee, or whatever free program you want. For paid programs Capture One is supposed to be pretty good but I haven't used it.

Greg Miller
24-Feb-2015, 04:24
Ah but that's the upgrade price. You conveniently ignore the fact that at some point everyone has to buy the full version before they can just buy upgrades. The full price of just Photoshop CS 6 (not the full suite of other applications) was $699 and for PS Extended it was $999. Then you've got to buy Lightroom 5 which was $149 (or $79 for the upgrade from LR 4, which was $300 new). So if you had never bought PS + LR before that's $848. Even if you never upgrade after that, amortizing it out that's 84 months, or seven years, to pay you back at $10 a month.

The $10 a month price for both PS + LR is a screaming deal by comparison. Plus, there is no large lump payment at the beginning of using the software, and upgrades are free. This is the direction all software is going in the future because it supplies he company with a more predictable, steady revenue stream instead of a big lump every few years. Microsoft and Apple are doing the same the as Adobe.

But, no one is making anyone use it. GIMP works fine for what it is, and you can organize your images with Light zone, Raw therapee, or whatever free program you want. For paid programs Capture One is supposed to be pretty good but I haven't used it.

You would be the exception. When Adobe switched to the CC model, millions of people already owned their copy of Photoshop. Then you have all the people who purchased their new copy of Photoshop via an educational license, which was cheap and allowed upgrades to the "regular" version at the normal upgrade price. Even if you paid the full $700 purchase price, amortized over a 30 year use period, it comes down to $2/month. And you owned it. You didn't have to keep paying for it to use it. If you upgraded every other version you were essentially paying $8 month (if you elected to pay anything)

Everyone knows this is the way software vendors are going. They love being able to make you pay every month or you take away access to the software.

David R Munson
24-Feb-2015, 05:27
Are people still arguing about this? If you don't like the subscription, don't subscribe. Stick with whatever aging version of Photoshop you have and grumble about it until the day you die. Meanwhile, I'll happily pay my subscription fee for what I consider to be excellent software at a reasonable rate that is constantly kept up to date. I like having the entire suite at my disposal and being able to afford having it there legitimately. I bough the suite in college in 2002 and it was great, until it started to go out of date and couldn't afford to keep it updated. I ended up keeping it updated, but not aboveboard. Now it's all legal again, everything works as it should, new features are getting better by the week, etc. It's a good scene. I'd rather flow with the way things are in this case than try to resist and spend my energy embittering myself with shit I can't do anything about when it would be better spent outside with a camera.

Greg Miller
24-Feb-2015, 05:41
Who's grumbling? If you targeting me, then you misinterpreted my words. I stated I did not like renting software (an opinion) and why, and provided an alternative looks at the costs. If have a calm headed discussion about the situation is grumbling, then I guess you can count me as guilty.

David R Munson
24-Feb-2015, 06:48
No targeting! Nothing aimed at you, Greg! But there *is* grumbling. Real, curmudgeonly grumbling.

Greg Miller
24-Feb-2015, 06:50
Well, it is a site full of curmudgeons talking about 50+ year old equipment and processes. Not much grumbling going on around here ;)

djdister
24-Feb-2015, 06:51
At some future point I will probably have to move to CC, but for the current time CS6 is still working just fine and nothing is forcing me to make the change.

David R Munson
24-Feb-2015, 07:20
Well, it is a site full of curmudgeons talking about 50+ year old equipment and processes. Not much grumbling going on around here ;)

Ha! And I say "curmudgeonly" knowing full well that others would use it to describe me in plenty of other capacities. It's not all bad. We all grumble about something.

jp
24-Feb-2015, 07:53
Let's look at correct numbers. I paid $221.60 for CS6 upgrade in 2012. I know I paid extra to get the CD but I don't know how much. But that would be $12/mo. if I upgraded every 18 months. Or $6/month if upgraded every other version, which is what many people did (and is where I am at since I am still using and felling no pain nor envy). The biggest difference is that with the purchase you would not lose access to your image files. With CC, if you stop paying, you no longer have software to access your .psd files. You want to make a print? Too bad. You want to make a jpg for a web site? Too bad. How confident is anyone that when they retire they can continue to pay the monthly fee? Doctor bills, prescription medicine, hospital bills,... $10/month assuming it stays that low, might be a hard nut to pay.

Would you rather pay $120 a month to own a car or $100 a month to lease? At least with a car you have the option.

Worst case, you'd have to get the 30 day free fully functional demo version installed so you could save your PSDs to another format. As Kirk has mentioned there are other options for opening files as well.

Comparing software to a car is apples and oranges. You never own software unless you make it yourself or have it custom made by a programmer on staff, and even then it's largely made with building blocks you don't own such as runtime libraries and open source code. When you "buy software", you are buying a license to use it, which is full of restrictions just like leased software. It's sort of like having the CS6 cd/dvd is like Vivian Maier's negatives; you've got the materials, someone else might have the rights, but a lot more clear cut with software because it was planned that way.

I know the car question is rhetorical, but I'd take the ownership option so I could buy just liability insurance rather than full coverage as the leasing company would require.

fishbulb
24-Feb-2015, 08:09
Even if you paid the full $700 purchase price, amortized over a 30 year use period, it comes down to $2/month.

Yes, I'm sure we all are still using Commodore 64's and IBM XT's from 30 years ago too. Good grief. Curmudgeons indeed. :p

Greg Miller
24-Feb-2015, 09:00
Worst case, you'd have to get the 30 day free fully functional demo version installed so you could save your PSDs to another format. As Kirk has mentioned there are other options for opening files as well.

Comparing software to a car is apples and oranges. You never own software unless you make it yourself or have it custom made by a programmer on staff, and even then it's largely made with building blocks you don't own such as runtime libraries and open source code. When you "buy software", you are buying a license to use it, which is full of restrictions just like leased software. It's sort of like having the CS6 cd/dvd is like Vivian Maier's negatives; you've got the materials, someone else might have the rights, but a lot more clear cut with software because it was planned that way.

I know the car question is rhetorical, but I'd take the ownership option so I could buy just liability insurance rather than full coverage as the leasing company would require.

My portfolio is large enough I could not possibly convert it in 30 days. And as Kirk said the other options are lame.

With PS6 I own the software license. I can use it as long as I choose to with no further payment to the Adobe. Just like I can use a car that I own as long as I want with no further payment to the car manufacturer.

Greg Miller
24-Feb-2015, 09:08
Yes, I'm sure we all are still using Commodore 64's and IBM XT's from 30 years ago too. Good grief. Curmudgeons indeed. :p

You missed the point. Historically you paid full price once for Photoshop. Then you could upgrade continuously for as long as Adobe offered upgrades. You could choose to upgrade or choose not too. I started with Photoshop 5.0. Some people started with Photoshop 1.0. You paid the upgrade price each time you elected to upgrade. This is what you originally wrote which prompted my response:


This used to cost about $1000 every couple years when new CS versions came out.

This is completely untrue. Upgrade prices were typically $150 to $200, and you could typically skip a version. So $150 to $200 every 3 years. Not $1,000 every couple of years.

Randy Moe
24-Feb-2015, 10:44
I started with PS 4, not CS 4 bundled for a great price with a scanner. The software seemed 'free'.

I just looked and I have CD's for CS 2 and CS 5.5 and who knows what other obsolete CD's are laying around.

I have tried various photo, video and music editing software over 18 years. Wasted a lot of money learning video, with gear and software. 6K that!

Since I do very little video now, I don't 'rent' the whole CS package as I first did when it was $30 for the first year. If it was still $30, I would pay that for the super duper all you can eat Adobe thingy.

My point is, that as an 'early adopter' I have spent oodles on useless crap and now way prefer 'renting'

Works real well for me.

I never bought vinyl records, mag tape ages poorly, CD's self destruct. Hard drives crash. The cloud is currently our safest place for anything. Endless HD backups hidden in banks fail just sitting there.

However I expect data storage to become organic and more like our own internal memory systems within our lifetimes. Pod people.

If you "like' buying just do it, nobody is going to convince 'renters' we are wrong.

Make yourself happy. Time is short.

John Bowen
24-Feb-2015, 18:00
Yes, I'm sure we all are still using Commodore 64's and IBM XT's from 30 years ago too. Good grief. Curmudgeons indeed. :p

Film and 5 1/4" Floppy disks.....what more could you ask?????

Jac@stafford.net
24-Feb-2015, 18:05
Film and 5 1/4" Floppy disks.....what more could you ask?????

I can only dream I were as old as when those floppys were state-of-the-art. :)

Randy Moe
24-Feb-2015, 19:07
I tossed all the 8" floppies from the lab in the late 90's. We had several pallets of them.

Before that, they used 3X5 cards for data, that was also indecipherable even when written in english. The notes were too cursory. Tossed that too.

Humans are lousy with history, always have been, what makes anybody think we are doing better.


We are piling ephemeral bits up in huge data warehouses that can fail in a blink. EMP anybody.

Maybe my CD of CS2 will survive, but the machine will not.

Adamphotoman
24-Feb-2015, 19:15
At this point I prefer owning the licence for PSCS. At some point I may start with CC.

BTW, Capture One Pro [CO8] is my go to software for 90% of my needs and then I finish up in PS. Also CO8 is available as either an upgrade purchase or a subscription.
Phase One tells us that if one opps for a subscription, and if an update is buggy, one can still use the older version.

Randy Moe
24-Feb-2015, 19:34
At this point I prefer owning the licence for PSCS. At some point I may start with CC.

BTW, Capture One Pro [CO8] is my go to software for 90% of my needs and then I finish up in PS. Also CO8 is available as either an upgrade purchase or a subscription.
Phase One tells us that if one opps for a subscription, and if an update is buggy, one can still use the older version.

Now I'm LOL. When did C1P go SS? The only reason I have not bought it, was it required a purchase!

I have used the trial several times...a few years ago...

Jim Andrada
24-Feb-2015, 23:46
My clients in Japan were the last maker of 8 1/2" floppy drives on the planet. Made a LOT of money.

I think there are only two companies that make any money from technology - the first one in and the last one out.

Adamphotoman
25-Feb-2015, 09:41
Capture One Pro started to offer subscription [also available for purchase] when version 8 was released September 16th. version 7 was released October 25 2012 almost 2 years later. I bought version 4 back in 2007. After new cameras are introduced Phase One provides free updates. It takes awhile and when a newer C1 version comes out they stop updating the older version forcing one to upgrade if and when one buys a new camera.

Much like Adobe.

Adobe is still updating Camera Raw for PS6 and CC

https://helpx.adobe.com/x-productkb/multi/camera-raw-plug-in-installer.html

Adamphotoman
25-Feb-2015, 09:44
I have tried DXO & On one's Perfect Photo suite as well but I much prefer the way that Capture One develops files from raw.

Ron McElroy
25-Feb-2015, 20:46
Maybe my CD of CS2 will survive, but the machine will not.

One thing the IT guys told me is Adobe had a licensing server crash that had all of the CS2 info stored on it. So yes your CS2 can be reused as long as it will load on the computer. Adobe can not check the licenses at all.

Randy Moe
25-Feb-2015, 21:16
One thing the IT guys told me is Adobe had a licensing server crash that had all of the CS2 info stored on it. So yes your CS2 can be reused as long as it will load on the computer. Adobe can not check the licenses at all.

I know about Adobe losing all our Adobe history of ownership.

That severely pissed me off.

fishbulb
26-Feb-2015, 08:37
On the other hand, anyone can now download CS2 for free. But it's no longer supported by Adobe and has been eclipsed by seven major updates (3, 4, 5, 6, CC, CC'14) so it's of limited usefulness.

Robert Brummitt
26-Feb-2015, 10:52
For most of my work is with Lightroom but once in awhile I use PS CS3 for may scanned film work. That's why I don't want to rent. I rarely open PS any more not enough to pay $10 a month. If Adobe decides to subscribe lightroom then I will have to with to another program. Sad. But I don't earn a living in photography. I do more volunteering of my camera.

Kirk Gittings
26-Feb-2015, 14:52
$10 a month or .30 a day MoL for a tool that is absolutely vital to how I make a living is frankly astonishingly cheap to me.

Robert Brummitt
26-Feb-2015, 15:59
$10 a month or .30 a day MoL for a tool that is absolutely vital to how I make a living is frankly astonishingly cheap to me.

I do not make a living from this you do. It makes sense. It makes sense for me not to subscribe.

Preston
26-Feb-2015, 18:19
I am still using CS6 and it does the job for me. I have no need for Lightroom since I do all my image management in another program and use ACR id PS for conversion of RAW files.

Having said that, if Adoobie comes up with a truly compelling feature set above and beyond CS6, I will certainly consider the PS-CC. It would be nice if Adoobie would offer PS-CC alone, without LR, for a reasonable monthly or annual fee.

--P

Kirk Gittings
26-Feb-2015, 18:24
Having said that, if Adoobie comes up with a truly compelling feature set above and beyond CS6 that will probably happen in time.

Kirk Gittings
26-Feb-2015, 18:31
it would be nice if Adoobie would offer PS-CC alone, without LR, for a reasonable monthly or annual fee.

Since PS (full version) is worth some $1000 and Lightroom some $150, I doubt such a subscription would save you much money.....like $8.50 a month vs. $10

Randy Moe
26-Feb-2015, 19:02
I wonder how many that worry so deeply about Adobe subscriptions have huge cable and cell phone subscriptions?

I cancelled cable long ago. I hate phones but my brother gave me a spare one and he pays the $10 a month on top of his bill for 4 phones. Otherwise he could only email me, which I prefer, but he is needs a talking to once in a while.

I used an iPod for years as cell phone, hopping on the McDonald's and Starbuck systems without going into their businesses. I do pay ATT for Internet, but if I ever find a way not to, I will. Doubtful. :( I cancelled the landline, didn't want to but ATT can't keep one working anymore...

I got rid of my unnecessary car so I don't pay car insurance. :) I own an older motorcycle and it is cheap to insure.

So what do you sacrifice for photography?

Kirk Gittings
26-Feb-2015, 19:12
I have no cable but do have a discounted cell service and smartphone. If they let me pick and choose cable stations and just pay for those I would.

Randy Moe
26-Feb-2015, 19:36
I have no cable but do have a discounted cell service and smartphone. If they let me pick and choose cable stations and just pay for those I would.

I sure wish they did that too.

Bruce Barlow
27-Feb-2015, 00:02
So what do you sacrifice for photography?

My sanity.

John Bowen
27-Feb-2015, 09:31
My sanity.

I'll second that.....anyone who would travel to Kiev in February for snow and ice photos needs their head examined :-)

Robert Brummitt
27-Feb-2015, 10:26
I wonder how many that worry so deeply about Adobe subscriptions have huge cable and cell phone subscriptions?

I cancelled cable long ago. I hate phones but my brother gave me a spare one and he pays the $10 a month on top of his bill for 4 phones. Otherwise he could only email me, which I prefer, but he is needs a talking to once in a while.

I used an iPod for years as cell phone, hopping on the McDonald's and Starbuck systems without going into their businesses. I do pay ATT for Internet, but if I ever find a way not to, I will. Doubtful. :( I cancelled the landline, didn't want to but ATT can't keep one working anymore...

I got rid of my unnecessary car so I don't pay car insurance. :) I own an older motorcycle and it is cheap to insure.

So what do you sacrifice for photography?

OK, for you. I have a family of four. Cell phones is a must to have communications with them. I rather have a simple stupid phone with no texting but I'm also of the age when dinosaurs roamed the lands. (How my kids feel). The same goes for family entertainment i.e. TV and cable. They want all stations while I'm happy with mostly standard TV and Redbox. Car insurance? I have three drivers and soon four. I think its wise and also required by law to have car insurance.

I had a subscription to my local newspaper. Then they went digital and said it will be cheaper for me. I would get more and pay about the same. Then they started to increasing my bill. A few dollars here and more there. Finally, I said enough. Its better for me to walk over to the local market and buy a copy when I want one. I'm taking charge of my money.

From what you are saying. You are also taking charge of your expenses. You and I are on the same boat.

My problem is I'm the only one who is the photographer of the family. No one else touches a camera except their cell phones. I don't use PS everyday. Not once a week, or a month. I don't make a living either teaching the software or commercially photographer. I am a simple soul who enjoys photography. I don't trust companies that want to attach themselves to my credit card. That's just bad news in my book. My wife also won't let me. She works in the banking system and says its very dangerous. Its great for the company! It builds a layer between themselves and their customer base if problems arise.

Like I said earlier, a friend found out that Adobe charged him $600 and he has been trying to have it fixed. But he has to go through his Credit Card as well.

So, if Adobe decides to go subscription for Lightroom. I will have to stop where I am and go with with either On1 or any other photo editing company.

Thank you.

Randy Moe
27-Feb-2015, 10:58
Robert,

I'm retired, my step-daughter became a photographer, but has quit to raise her wonder teenage boys and teach grade school.

For people even cheaper than me I recomend http://picasa.google.com/ I use it everyday for web resizing and adding my email to the bottom right of any picture that leaves my loft by any means.

I use CS PS first then Picasa for web versions. Sure I could do that in CS PS, but it's not as fast.

Shootar401
27-Feb-2015, 19:07
To the best of my knowledge it calls home periodically and if a month or so goes by without being able to connect you're screwed - not sure how often one can't connect for a whole month though. Hasn't been a real problem at all. (I did have a period when my internet service crapped out for a few days so I stuck a USB Wifi adapter in the machine and tethered to my iPhone. Worked OK for critical stuff like e-mail and Adobe never complained.

There are versions of CC that can be installed on systems not connected to the internet. You don't need a internet connection to install or "check" back with Adobe.

Preston
27-Feb-2015, 21:20
In the previous post here, there appear to be two trains of thought...

PS-CC calls home periodically, and some versions do not.

So, for those who may be wondering what really happens, where is definitive information from Adobe to be found? Is there a link, or links?

Thanks,

--P

Lenny Eiger
28-Feb-2015, 11:33
If you're on a mac there's a program called Little Snitch that can tell you everything that goes from your computer to the net... You'd be surprised at the volume..... truly annoying...
I'm certain those things are there for the PC as well, I just don't know the name of it...
Lenny

paulr
28-Feb-2015, 12:27
A lot of people get rid of intrusive DRM features by hacking the software they buy. I do it all the time. Just do a search and download whatever cracks are available for your application. With Adobe products it's just a matter of blocking outgoing connections to a handful of ip addresses, and replacing one of the frameworks within the application.

Randy Moe
28-Feb-2015, 12:27
If you're on a mac there's a program called Little Snitch that can tell you everything that goes from your computer to the net... You'd be surprised at the volume..... truly annoying...
I'm certain those things are there for the PC as well, I just don't know the name of it...
Lenny

Cool, but does it spot the NSA?

I will install it on my Mac, but WIN? Anybody?

paulr
28-Feb-2015, 13:18
I have Little Snitch, and ended up turning it off. It did its job too well. The constant barrage of warnings didn't let me get any work done.

I think it would have gotten better if I'd had the patience to work with it for a couple of weeks to teach it which outgoing connections to stop flagging. But I ran out of patience.

paulr
28-Feb-2015, 13:21
I have Little Snitch, and ended up turning it off. It did its job too well. The constant barrage of warnings didn't let me get any work done.

I think it would have gotten better if I'd had the patience to work with it for a couple of weeks to teach it which outgoing connections to stop flagging. But I ran out of patience.

Re: Windows ... I don't know if there's a version of Little Snitch, but there must be lots of outgoing firewalls to choose from. That's all the thing is. The built-in firewalls in OSX are very good, but are both different implementations of incoming firewalls.

Fred L
28-Feb-2015, 15:36
If someone needs a program and is not doing intricate editing, PS Elements is a good alternative and you own it. I upgraded mine version when I thought I might lose my company installed full PS (which never came to pass, fortunately). I think for most hobby photographers, Elements is all they'll ever need. ymmv

Lenny Eiger
1-Mar-2015, 10:49
I have Little Snitch, and ended up turning it off. It did its job too well. The constant barrage of warnings didn't let me get any work done.

I think it would have gotten better if I'd had the patience to work with it for a couple of weeks to teach it which outgoing connections to stop flagging. But I ran out of patience.

I think this is a fair criticism. I had to turn mine off as well. Training is a good idea, but also having a database of references. What is fmfd, nbagent or IMTransferAGent,xpc. It's true that I could look these all up in a search engine, but there are simply too many...

There is also no way to know what information each of these items are sending back. That would really help..

With Little Snitch installed one can see that their computers report back thousands of times, whether it be for innocuous software updating checks or notifications or some web site wanting to sense their location, read in all their contacts and everything else. I think there would be a public uproar if the public at large knew what was going on...

Lenny

Randy Moe
1-Mar-2015, 13:18
Hopeless imho

paulr
1-Mar-2015, 14:00
It may be helpful to install something like little Snitch just for while (maybe there's a trial version?) ... this would give you a general idea of what's going. You'd be better able to decide if you need this kind of security all the time.

Randy Moe
1-Mar-2015, 14:53
It may be helpful to install something like little Snitch just for while (maybe there's a trial version?) ... this would give you a general idea of what's going. You'd be better able to decide if you need this kind of security all the time.

Ever since I joined the online world I have made it a point to do nothing I am ashamed of and not to look at things I am ashamed of.

I believe we need 'Real ID' for Internet users. It will come. Don't Stone the messenger...

Maybe I'm off point here, but besides banking what do we really need secure.

paulr
3-Mar-2015, 13:32
Ever since I joined the online world I have made it a point to do nothing I am ashamed of and not to look at things I am ashamed of.

Privacy is about more than covering up wrongdoing. It can be about preventing identity theft, other kinds of theft, other kinds of invasions of your personal life, etc. etc..

Also, as many have discovered the hard way, even information that's not shameworthy can be used against you if framed the right way. This comes up for people who become political activists or journalists, who, through the honest execution of their work make enemies in high places. The desire for privacy is not something to be ashamed of.

Randy Moe
3-Mar-2015, 14:35
Privacy is about more than covering up wrongdoing. It can be about preventing identity theft, other kinds of theft, other kinds of invasions of your personal life, etc. etc..

Also, as many have discovered the hard way, even information that's not shameworthy can be used against you if framed the right way. This comes up for people who become political activists or journalists, who, through the honest execution of their work make enemies in high places. The desire for privacy is not something to be ashamed of.

True, and I am too dirty for public office. Or is that the other way round.

I learned very early how anything can be twisted into a different message.

Stealing identities, reputations and wealth is often beyond our control.

I remain very cynical about a lot of things.

;)

Lenny Eiger
4-Mar-2015, 09:27
Maybe I'm off point here, but besides banking what do we really need secure.

I hear this from a lot of people. There are 2 issues right off the bat... I don't want to get political here. We must not forget that this country is based on the ability to dissent. From our own dissenting we call the American Revolution to the First Amendment rights we enjoy. When the government knows everything about you it is easy to build a case based upon a twisting of whatever story is discovered. It stifles dissent, and this is documented heavily. It's not a good thing when the people can't speak their minds.

The other issue is shopping. I don't want the endless spam I get, the garbage that gets thru the spam filter. Life is not about shopping. Most of the people here are enjoying photography where they attempt to look closer at something and discover something about real life. The endless ads build a society based on consumerism. We are told what to think, what to buy, etc. It may be over already, but I'm going to block those tracking cookies anyway.

Lenny

appletree
22-Apr-2015, 12:14
Bumping an oldish thread.

I read through a few pages. I am thinking about getting the $9.99 subscription. Rather than upgrading from LR3 to 6, I could get this and have PS. Although overall it means more expenses /month. This plus store plus site. Running about $360 a year total. I need to sell a few prints each year.

PS is probably really complicated though...even for my young-tech-minded-self.

I never use my netflix. Contemplating canceling it and getting this, as it would be a wash.

I spent forever organizing Lightroom. I would hope none of that will be lost when going over to the new version.

From the pages I read, lots of people seem happy with it. And for the price...it seems wise. I spent $ 150 3 years ago on Lightroom. This would be a few bucks more overall, but I now have PS on my machine. Maybe quicker to edit (basic-editing) through it than the Develop tool in Lightroom. Hmmmm, decisions.

fishbulb
22-Apr-2015, 12:52
PS is probably really complicated though...even for my young-tech-minded-self.


It's not as bad as it seems. And if you start scanning your negatives, PS is great for spot removal, especially with the clone stamp and the content-aware healing brush. Lightroom has good tools for that, but for whatever reason tends to slow down a lot when doing spot healing on a large file, say a 80MP or 300MP .tiff. Photoshop handles these large files much better, even though both programs are 64-bit.



I spent forever organizing Lightroom. I would hope none of that will be lost when going over to the new version.


Nah, I'm using a catalog that I've migrated from LR 2 to 3 to 4 to 5 to 6 over the years. Still works fine. You can import any earlier catalogs into the latest version of LR, even if you're skipping versions.




From the pages I read, lots of people seem happy with it. And for the price...it seems wise. I spent $ 150 3 years ago on Lightroom. This would be a few bucks more overall, but I now have PS on my machine. Maybe quicker to edit (basic-editing) through it than the Develop tool in Lightroom. Hmmmm, decisions.


$120 a year isn't terrible, and if you shoot a lot (especially with digital) LR is a must-have just for organization. Plus, some of the new features of LR and PS are pretty great - correction of motion blur and the content-aware tools in PS, and all of the improved editing tools in LR. The new LR that was just announced yesterday is a major upgrade, and has quite a few new features. Plus there were features added in 4, 5 and 6.

That said, if all you're doing is basic spot removal, contrast/curves, cropping, that kind of thing, and want to save money, just get The GIMP, which is a free photoshop-like application (http://www.gimp.org/) (although not nearly as advanced). You can continue using LR3 and edit your scans in The GIMP to do clone-stamp work etc. And you don't have to spend $120/year just for a few tricks like content-aware fill.

Randy Moe
22-Apr-2015, 13:01
If you are going to be serious about photography, get CC, use it everyday and you soon will be very glad you have it and can use it.

If you don't watch NetFlix, dump it for CC and you will be happy.

I use both for hours everyday. I don't have cable, landline, or a cell phone data plan.

Time is money, even when you are young. Spend it wisely.

appletree
22-Apr-2015, 13:12
I spend it un-wisely. Often too much video games! A lot of time reading too though. And photography.

Thanks for the advice guys. I will probably pull the trigger after saving up for a scanner. Done spent my budget on lenses and a tripod/ballhead.
Seems worth it for the long-haul.

And thanks, I am familiar with Gimp, a little. Have it on my office computer for random one-off things.

Does seem like there are more plug-ins and such for PS nowadays. Good news is I spend less time editting photos since I try and keep a much cleaner and exact workflow in my scanning process. That and weeding out photos. I use to edit every single one, even "bad" images.

My process has definitely grown in efficiency over the years.

Preston
22-Apr-2015, 13:17
PS is probably really complicated though...

Photoshop requires one to negotiate the learning curve, just like everything that's new to your LF toolbox. PS is very powerful, and, as Adam says, it's designed for large complex files. The ability to add non-destructive adjustment layers, create layer masks, etc. is a real boon. Ps will do the simple things, such as spotting, balancing color, adjusting contrast, hue/saturation, etc. with relative ease once you're used to the tools. Also, there are a ton of tutorials and there's the PS Help file, too. It takes practice, but it's certainly not insurmountable.

Having Photoshop, with all it's power and many useful tools, will be there as your skills and demands continue to grow.

--P

jp
22-Apr-2015, 14:40
The other side of the coin regarding the complexity / learning curve is that PS is so widely used and well documented, google/youtube can quickly get you to any howto to do anything you want. Abode's documentation is good too. If you're trying to figure out something new in PS, chances are good there are half a dozen good youtube videos showing how other people have tackled it.

Eric Biggerstaff
22-Apr-2015, 18:31
Love CC! At $10 a month it is less than one "bomber" of my favorite Belgian brew which I like to sip on while I am working on digital files (or in the darkroom for that matter). Today I downloaded all updates and the latest version of LR. For me, 85% of what I do is covered by LR but PS is sort of fun to learn, so why not. I will never be an expert in any of these applications but I enjoy learning.

Lenny Eiger
23-Apr-2015, 12:07
I have it for about two weeks now and they did fix a couple of things. it now opens and closes large files faster. That's great. They also fixed the magic spotting tool. It now works much faster... It's not perfect, just a little better.

I still haven't figured out how to protect myself, I don't have the time at the moment...

Lenny

Derek Kennedy
24-Apr-2015, 13:23
ive been using PS for ages. and I have to say, i dont like 'renting' a program. Dont like it at all.

With that being said, the price IS cheap at $10 a month. I learn more things about how to use PS every day, usually forget it a day later but that just means I can re-learn it :P

I like being able to have a constantly up to date program, thats a plus. The addition of new features is great too when they are available.

I use ps pretty much on a daily basis whether Im working on a photo I took with a digital camera or film so its a good investment as far as im concerned.

Randy Moe
24-Apr-2015, 13:28
LR6 CC is now available.

Lenny Eiger
16-Jun-2015, 17:33
OK, now there is an answer to this. They just released another update and now its worth it. They fixed the Spot Healing Brush. It's now almost as instant as cloning. no more waiting. I'm working on a 7.4 Gig image and the response is right away....

Lenny

Jac@stafford.net
16-Jun-2015, 17:37
Lenny, some of PS now uses late model GPUs for certain options.

I wonder how some of us with older systems could benefit?
Any idea?

Thanks.

Randy Moe
16-Jun-2015, 18:53
There's a bunch of improvements.

Yes it is worth more.

All you need is a good enough computer.

I have a lot of new things I will trying, not necessarily for LF.

Quick scratch and ram dump.

Peter De Smidt
16-Jun-2015, 20:11
Randy, did you palettes change size when you did the update? Mine did, and I haven't figured out how to make them smaller. They're as small as they can be made by dragging the edges.

Randy Moe
16-Jun-2015, 21:21
Randy, did you palettes change size when you did the update? Mine did, and I haven't figured out how to make them smaller. They're as small as they can be made by dragging the edges.


Peter, can't help you there, just had install issues which failed my keyboard in Chrome at the exact moment I loaded 2015 PS CC on Win8.1. I could type in Win, but not in Chrome until restart, mouse was fine all USB ports were fine. Odd

Adobe did warn to close ALL apps, but I guess missed Chrome was open. CC PS 2015 seems snappier, but not really exploring yet.

Now on to the Mac upload.

Preston
16-Jun-2015, 22:21
Hey guys,

A member over at NPN has posted some detailed instructions and notes (http://www.naturephotographers.net/imagecritique/bbs.cgi?a=vm&mr=78183&CGISESSID=67ccbf967803e83956ef0946698f29e2&u=9060)regarding this latest update to PSCC.

If the link doesn't work, go to NPN's general Discussion Forum (http://www.naturephotographers.net/imagecritique/bbs.cgi?a=vf2&ns=1). The thread is titled "Photoshop CC 2015 Is Released" by Paul DeCesare.

I hope this helps those of you who are using PSCC.

--P

fishbulb
17-Jun-2015, 09:45
Lenny, some of PS now uses late model GPUs for certain options.

I wonder how some of us with older systems could benefit?
Any idea?

Thanks.

Lightroom CC / Lightroom 6 also now supports GPU acceleration as well! Here are some details on the GPU support that's been added to PS, LR, and Camera Raw:



Summary:

1. GPU support is currently available in Develop only.
2. Most (but not all) Develop controls benefit from GPU acceleration.
3. Using the GPU involves some overhead (there's no free lunch). This may make some operations take longer, such as image-to-image switching or zooming to 1:1. Newer GPUs and computer systems minimize this overhead.
4. The GPU performance improvement in Develop is more noticeable on higher-resolution displays such as 4K. The bigger the display, the bigger the win.
5. Prefer newer GPUs (faster models within the last 3 years). Lightroom may technically work on older GPUs (4 to 5 years old) but likely will not benefit much. At least 1 GB of GPU memory. 2 GB is better.
6. We're currently investigating using GPUs and other technologies to improve performance in Develop and other areas of the app going forward.

The above notes also apply to Camera Raw 9.0 for Photoshop/Bridge CC.


The above is taken from a post by an Adobe employee, here: https://forums.adobe.com/thread/1828580

So, it seems like pretty much any GPU is supported as long as it has over 1GB of memory: https://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/kb/photoshop-graphics-processor-troubleshooting-faq.html

For those of us with dedicated video cards and multiple displays, this is a huge upgrade of Photoshop and Lightroom. I've got a giant Nvidia GTX 680 with 4 GB of memory (this one (http://www.gigabyte.us/products/product-page.aspx?pid=4373#ov)), that barely fits in my PC case and takes up three expansion card slots. Now I can finally get some benefit out of it besides just when playing video games ;-)

Lenny Eiger
17-Jun-2015, 13:02
Lenny, some of PS now uses late model GPUs for certain options.

I wonder how some of us with older systems could benefit?
Any idea?

Thanks.

Jac,

I wish I had an answer for you.... I'm using a Mac Intel Pro from mid 2010 (one of the later cheese graters). 24 Gigs RAM

Don't know if that helps you...

Lenny

Barry Kirsten
17-Jun-2015, 13:44
I think Jac is referring to the graphics processor. I've just signed up for a CC subscription and am on a steep learning curve with it. One of the things I discovered is that for these programs my graphics processor is limited. I have a Mac mini with a lower end AMD Radeon graphics card, which apparently limits some of the things that can be done, like 3D rendering. Fortunately I can live with that. I think Jac is suggesting a graphics card update may solve your problems.

Justin777
17-May-2017, 14:11
There are many better and simpler alternatives. Affinity that was mentioned before or Luminar (https://macphun.com/luminar). So my verdict is that it'll become a museum exhibit in the nearest future.

Peter De Smidt
18-Jul-2017, 22:09
It's terrific. It's the most used post production software for commercial work. It's incredibly powerful, and there are tons of great tutorials online.

bob carnie
19-Jul-2017, 06:13
I find it terrific as well.. use it every day.

AtlantaTerry
19-Jul-2017, 07:29
I have also been looking at the On1 product line.

FYI, they have a free 30 day evaluation available that does not put any kind of watermark on the image you edit.

faberryman
19-Jul-2017, 07:44
The other problem, and the other reason I moved from LR/PS 6 to LR/PS CC, is that the older versions are incompatible with the newer camera RAW image files. You can use DNG Converter or a third party program to open newer files and save them as DNG files, but it is an extra time consuming step. For $10/month (two coffees) it is acceptable, though I still bristle and the subscription model.

faberryman
19-Jul-2017, 07:46
I think Jac is referring to the graphics processor. I've just signed up for a CC subscription and am on a steep learning curve with it. One of the things I discovered is that for these programs my graphics processor is limited. I have a Mac mini with a lower end AMD Radeon graphics card, which apparently limits some of the things that can be done, like 3D rendering. Fortunately I can live with that. I think Jac is suggesting a graphics card update may solve your problems.
I am running a 2011 Mac Mini with a 27" Thunderbolt display. Speed is fine, and I haven't found anything I can't do with my images. I am not sure how or why I would use 3D rendering on my photos.

Preston
19-Jul-2017, 08:06
Here is some info from Adobe on GPU and Photo Shop CC 2017 (https://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/kb/photoshop-cc-gpu-card-faq.html) that may be of help.
--P

Sasquatchian
20-Jul-2017, 00:18
Even at $49.99 a month for the entire suite is a bargain. I use Ps, Illustrator, Premiere, Audition, InDesign, Acrobat Pro, Adobe Media Encoder, and Bridge all on a regular basis. For those who still *hate* renting their software - how many lease their cars, pay monthly fees for cell phone, cable and internet access. We can argue all we want about the merits - and the merits are almost all in Adobe's accounting department's favor, but if want to stay current with the latest software that runs on the latest operating systems, and given the fact that Adobe is not giving us any other options for using their software, we really don't have much choice. Yeah, you can make a principled stand against it but it won't help you in the end. Just another monthly fee among many others, most of which are more than Adobe's.

Pali K
20-Jul-2017, 07:56
I bought Affinity and must admit that it's an excellent alternative to Photoshop. However, my brain is so aligned with Photoshop that I can't stay away from it. I also rely very heavily on ColorPerfect plugin which does not work with Affinity.

I find that the 9.99 price for Photoshop and Lightroom is very reasonable.

Pali

Corran
26-Jul-2017, 09:24
Just a quick heads-up on an issue I ran into with CC, which may already be known but just in case:

I have a full retail copy of CS6, which is what I use primarily, but I needed to use the new Premiere in CC for a project so I installed CC using a year-long institutional credit. Didn't think much about it till CS6 suddenly let me know that my subscription to CC was coming to an end. Yes, CS6, NOT CC, told me my subscription was ending. So I dismissed the warning because I didn't care and wasn't going to be using CC anymore anyway. Well the deadline passed...and guess what, I was locked out of CS6. Let me reiterate: my old copy of CS6, that I paid for, was locked completely by CC at the end of my subscription.

I did a complete uninstall of CC and it still had me locked out. I used a cleaner tool to completely wipe out CC and it still didn't work. I had to do a complete uninstall of CS6 as well, then go into some system files to completely delete hidden CC files, which was power-user stuff that many would be unable to do, and finally reinstall CS6 from scratch to get it to work again.

I've read this on other websites and thought it was a bit harsh but I now have to agree - CC is basically malware and ransomware. There is absolutely no reason why it should disable CS6 at the termination of a CC subscription. Moving forward I am not touching CC with a ten-foot pole. I may be in the minority but I don't see the value for what I do and I certainly do not condone Adobe's software interaction with previous Photoshop iterations. Buyer beware.

Sasquatchian
26-Jul-2017, 19:50
Corran - Sorry about what you've been through, but yours is the very first time I've heard about this. Practically everyone I know is and has been running CS6 Standalone right along side every version of CC that has come down the pike - and all with no problems at all. What OS and OS version are you on and did you call Adobe (and yes they're pretty bad for CS now) to see what they recommend and why this happened. I have every version going back to v3 in 1995 and have never had any conflict, and on my main Mac Pro tower, the versions go back to CS or CS2. It does sound like some wires got crossed somewhere along the way and it's Adobe that should help you uncross them so it doesn't happen again. All that being said, there really is little reason to go back once you're using CC2017, as so many little things have been tweaked and improved along the way. Just be sure to click on the Advanced option before actually downloading and installing any new CC application, and uncheck the option to wipe all previous CC versions off you drive, which will also dump any plugins you might be using. Now that really is a crappy default.

Corran
26-Jul-2017, 20:42
I did some research trying to fix the issue and found others with the same problem. Not sure if there is a root cause. I am running Windows 7 64-bit here.

I didn't think to call Adobe because my experience with on-the-phone IT help is skewed very negative. I have been working on computers since before grade school and generally know more than any phone jockey. I did work it out, in my own way, and while I understand others may disagree I have no interest in the newer CC versions of the software. I currently don't have any clients needing cross-compatibility (which was my original reason for getting a CC subscription) so for the time being I will be sticking with what works and doesn't cost me a monthly fee (which I am frankly also very much against!!).