hiOriginally Posted by Ken Lee
yes, the beta version support 16bit 32 bit
color management is supported, but i heard it is abit slow when turned on..
we must put our support for gimp.. they are going to implement layer adjustment etc.. they lack funds.. so given enough funds they can move fast and releasse all the features that are needed to level with PS..
Bruce....please. I've been at this since 1978. I know how to figure costs into my fees but in case you haven't noticed we are coming out of a recession and fees around here have been hammered. One example is editorial. In 2006 I was getting $2500 a day locally for editorial and turning down work right and left. Now it is $600-$800. Most of my competition filed bankruptsy during the recession (doesn't mean they have gone away) but not me because I watch all fixed expenses and debt like a hawk. Adobe has us by the balls and they know it. IMO the cost is seemingly low now to mitigate the blow back but once the dust settles and we are all renting their software-watch out. They will be coming for your wallet.
Thanks,
Kirk
at age 73:
"The woods are lovely, dark and deep,
But I have promises to keep,
And miles to go before I sleep,
And miles to go before I sleep"
Like what a decade late to the party?
Thanks,
Kirk
at age 73:
"The woods are lovely, dark and deep,
But I have promises to keep,
And miles to go before I sleep,
And miles to go before I sleep"
I wish we had some higher end options not only for a Photoshop competitor but for InDesign and Illustrator as well. If only a developer removed about 500 Adobe "features" and gave us lean, fast applications, photographers and designers would flock to it. If it came in at half the price they'd see a multi-billion $ market overnight....
Why hasn't this happened yet? Did Adobe lock up the technology that well? Isn't that a monopoly, shouldn't there be an anti-trust case brought up?
no choice, this is the state of free software.. soem grow fast, some slower..
Because it is not a multi-billion dollar industry overnight ...
They own a significant amount of patents, know-how and trade-secrets ... it takes time to overcome this all if you start from scratch ... I don't see anyone with a product that is overall even remotely close (I know this is debatable) ... there is other software out there but only covering a smallish portion of what Adobe does and whatever is out there is not necessarily "better" ... 100 users, 100 different opinions ...
It is not Adobe's "fault" there is no serious competition around and they are not necessarily engaged in practices that warrant "anti-trust" measures although I'm pretty sure a lot of users feel otherwise ...
Adobe is not the only company locking up their market and changing business model on their customers in a more or less unilateral way for a variety of "business" reasons ... in the end ... if you don't like them, don't use them ... and no one is prohibited from going after their market
I'm pretty sure though they'll follow the developments and their bottom line very closely and in the end, the latter dictates the course of action.
I've been using PS since version 1. That means I've sunk a bunch of money with Adobe over the years and that I made that money and a little left over with their tools. I think its always been pricey, but it made good business sense. For whatever all that is worth.
By going "service" Adobe is hoping to keep their cash cows alive for a bit longer. While computers increased in capacity and speed over the years, mature software has lagged in real improvements. Believe it or not, you can get your work done on a 7-8 year old Mac and the same age PS, and not much slower but certainly just as good as the very latest and newest stuff. There is nothing more to innovate speed, power or quality wise for still pictures on the web. Photoshop is grown up now.
Paper publishing is shrinking, and software to do it is shrinking in sales along with it. (has been for a while) All that is left is to collect rent on the position the software publishers occupy and where there is some demand for their products. What you're seeing is not some hot new genius business model, its just plain old rent seeking. And I suppose they have earned it.
But its not going to be friendly to you. Adobe is firmly planted in the driver's seat and buckled in once this happens. We won't like it now and we won't like it later. But here it is. Expect to see more of this from other companies. In the meantime, this might be a good time to pick up a newer machine and a recent version of PS that does not have to "phone home". That should keep you safe for another 5-7 years. After that, bend on over.
"After that, bend on over."
Thanks,
Kirk
at age 73:
"The woods are lovely, dark and deep,
But I have promises to keep,
And miles to go before I sleep,
And miles to go before I sleep"
I think it's a good deal... I have a kneejerk reaction against subscription-based software, but ultimately it's worth it to me to pay $50 / month to have access to all of Adobe's products. I use Illustrator and Photoshop every day, and InDesign pretty often. Every once in a while I need After Effects. To get those four products "the old way" would necessitate a $2500 purchase (Master Collection) and expensive periodic upgrades.
To keep this on the topic of LF, Photoshop is really the only software that can handle the gigantic files we have to deal with. GIMP is great, but try opening a 2400 DPI 8x10 scan, dustbusting it, applying curves, sharpening and downsampling it for print. If you've ever used GIMP, you know how hilarious that last sentence is.
If you only need Photoshop, it's only $20 / month with no contract, whereas the previous version was $600 outright. That equates to two and a half years of use. After two and a half years, Adobe would be coming around to get your upgrade fee to the next Creative Suite. I prefer to just pay them monthly and get the latest software as it's available.
Obviously I'd like to have a free or cheaper alternative, but there's really nothing out there. Nothing even remotely close.
They're just going to split the market between those are willing and able to pay, those who will grudgingly switch to something less capable, and everyone else who will pirate the software. Which is just like now, but I'm betting the first group gets smaller and the third group larger.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks