Believe it or not, I JUST found out about Adobe's new model!

[FlyingSquirrel]

You'll most likely be shocked that I wasn't aware of the new Adobe pricing model until today. I tend to live in a bubble (I know, that's really bad), so this kind of stuff sneaks up on me sometimes. In any case, I just learned that Photoshop is no longer available as a perpetual license single purchase.

I realize by now this is probably a beating a dead horse with a stick yet again, but I just had to say something because it kind of irks me. I guess the thing that is most frustrating (but I'll force myself to deal with) is that, with how critically dependent I am upon LR and PS, the perpetual annual payments for ever and ever sort of feels like they own me and my photography. Basically, my entire photo library (the files themselves, as well as the catalog) are all tied up in it, and if I stop paying, I am basically completely and utterly screwed. Considering that I want to make photography into a career in the future years, the idea of being that dependent on something like this is rather frightening.

I do have Adobe CS6 (with photoshop cs6 and LR4 added on), but I can only hold on to that so long until it will get ridiculously outdated. I should probably think ahead and take the lesser pain of moving to the new subscription model instead of playing the futile resistance game. Adobe says they will indefinitely offer Lightroom as a separate, purchasable software; I can't see that as being of any use to me since I use Photoshop anyway, so I'd need them to be compatible and up to date. I'm also curious if, were I to be on the subscription with LR, and then cancel, would I be able to purchase LR as the separate boxed software, install it, and continue with my catalog, edits, and data in LR as if nothing had occurred? (minus the fact that I wouldn't have PS anymore).

One of the things that is good is that I found out about this while there is still time to subscribe at the special $10 a month rate. I guess I'll bow down to Adobe and subscribe now...

[pnodrog]

What a lovely sheltered life you have.. Well that is if I believe you. This is a link to one of the several threads of despair and anguish over this unnoticed event.

[Colin Southern]

I was one of the early adopters ... and I love it.

The subscription model fits right in with the subscription models for my:

- anti-virus

- my cloud storage

- my television content

- other online training

- My in-depth Formula 1 news

- my smart phone backup service

- my music sync service

It's the way the world has gone.

A lot of people have "tossed their toys out of the cot" over it (and I might add that many more just signed up for it), but my honest opinion is that "they doth complain too much". Adobe make some damn fine stuff and at the moment I get ALL of it for around a $1 a day. In contrast I spend around 15 times that just on lunch.

If you're planning on becoming a full-time professional then it's a reasonable assumption that you'll get a benefit from staying current (time is money -- so tools that allow you to do a better job, faster pay for themselves quickly) -- and in that context the subscription model will probably cost you about the same as initial purchase and upgrades would have.

[allenlennon]

I love it, but only got photoshop cc from it, for about $22 a month(Australian). I have no need for any of the other programs, well as of now anyways. And no, im not a full time, part time or casual professional. Just as a hobby.

[FlyingSquirrel]

Thanks guys. Colin, you make some very good points and I see your point of view. I was thinking about this some more after I made my OP, and probably the scariest thing about all of this that I forgot to mention is the possibility of price increases over time for the subscription service. I guess it is just freaks me out that I could be dependent on it (e.g. if it were my career one day) and then they hike the prices way up and I am stuck. Well, I know the correct thing to do is just go with it and whatever happens, happens, so I will roll with that plan.

[FlyingSquirrel]

Oh, and one more thought: I am going to use this as a learning experience in that I need to make sure to be less dependent on specific companies and technologies. In other words, I need to always be thinking how I can spread my resources, files, work, value, etc etc across multiple technologies, formats, and such, thereby reducing the damage that would occur if one of said companies went under or technologies became obsolete (happens all the time!). I will think about this. For a start, I'm going to save a copy of every psd I have as a TIFF file.

[jcuknz]

While I do have 'the latest' with Paint Shop Pro I know that my version 8 will do much of what I want to do ... we are now with 16 so I think it will take a long time for CS6 to get really 'bad' And if that is the case you could change over to PSP so long as they do not copy Adobe. so long as you have CS6 working I do not really see any great need to change to tiffs, and I assume PSE reads psd files. PSP has always be able to read psd unlike fool adobe not reading pspimage... you could get PSP for the couple of tools it has that PS doesn't .. no more expensive than the plug-ins which PS users had to buy in the old days for similar single functions, and with PSP you get a full blown editing programme comparable with PS.

[Colin Southern]

I'm sure the price will go up over time (everything does) -- but then again, so does our income (don't you long for the day when petrol was 18c a gallon!). I don't see the price of a subscription going up being any more of a concern than the price of the product / upgrades going up.

As for it going up disproportionately, I'm not worried about it at all; Adobe aren't stupid -- they need to survive on a commercial footing and doing something like that would be commercial suicide. At the end of the day, if people don't want it, it doesn't stop them moving forward with another solution, and if they wanted to batch-convert their existing work then it's not going to stop anyone opening existing work either.

So some reason some folks seem to have an almost pathological hate for companies like Adobe and Microsoft (and Apple - and others) -- almost as if they feel it's immoral to run a successful & profitable business instead of pouring billions into the development (staff, premises, infrastructure etc) and then giving it away for free. Thankfully those folks are in the minority

Just sign up (with a strong password!) - sit back - and enjoy

[Colin Southern]

Oh, and one more thought: I am going to use this as a learning experience in that I need to make sure to be less dependent on specific companies and technologies. In other words, I need to always be thinking how I can spread my resources, files, work, value, etc etc across multiple technologies, formats, and such, thereby reducing the damage that would occur if one of said companies went under or technologies became obsolete (happens all the time!). I will think about this. For a start, I'm going to save a copy of every psd I have as a TIFF file.

In terms of "threats", an effective backup strategy is probably by far the most important thing (in terms of both images and business documents). Some people think they're safe because they copy everything to a single external drive once every month or two -- and then leave that drive sitting on their desk (sometimes even powered up and connected to their PC) where it can easily be damaged by a power spike, fire, earthquake, theft, virus etc.

Others put theirs in a fire-proof safe, not realising the BIG difference between a fire-proof safe and a data-safe safe.

Those who systematically backup their data - have at least 3 copies at any given time, one of which is held in a secure location elsewhere - are already well ahead of the curve. Personally, I'm putting more and more stuff in Google Drive ("the cloud") -- the ease by which I can access it anywhere - not to mention share it - makes it a no-brainer for me. For most, I would suggest that the changes of losing their work due to lack of backups are about a zillion times greater than losing it through a company like Adobe going bust and having no way to open the data.

[pnodrog]

In terms of PP, Lightroom and CS6 offers everything I need. It may not be as efficient as newer versions but as it is not a commercial activity a small performance penalty is unimportant. Of more concern is the software's continued compatibility with developments in operating software. The file type compatibility is something I will keep an eye on but I think we are far from a stage that I feel the need to make a TIFF copy of all my PSD files. It may well be that a new better universal image file type will emerge before PSD support disappears. From a security point of view having backup files of different formats may well be prudent but for reasons other than just compatibility.

It is highly likely that I will eventually move to Adobe CC but at present it makes economic sense to extract every cents worth out of my current software - the enhancements at present are just not worth it for me. My move Adobe CC will probably be as a logical progression to support a new camera technology but having just upgraded my camera after 6 years with the previous one it will be a few years before I do it again.

There is a vast difference in the logic of taking up a subscription to Adobe CC depending on whether you have a commercial or non-commercial interest in photography. For amateurs it is part of a decision as to how they wish to spend their disposable income (if there is any)...

[Mike Buckley]

Others put theirs in a fire-proof safe

I would be willing to bet that almost all of those people have it in a fire-resistant safe, not a fire-proof safe. I'm not even sure there is anything that is completely fire-proof. I know the safe that I use is only fire-resistant, though the copies of the stuff in my safe are in two different external locations.

[FlyingSquirrel]

In terms of PP, Lightroom and CS6 offers everything I need.

That is true for me as well...

Of more concern is the software's continued compatibility with developments in operating software

I hadn't thought of that factor, but it's a real threat. I have some software and even hardware that no longer is usable due to upgrades in OS and other technologies.

There is a vast difference in the logic of taking up a subscription to Adobe CC depending on whether you have a commercial or non-commercial interest in photography.

True. At this point, I don't see myself starting up a business for at least a few years, not to mention I doubt I'll be making tons of money off it right away (or ever...)

Those who systematically backup their data - have at least 3 copies at any given time, one of which is held in a secure location elsewhere - are already well ahead of the curve.

That is what I do. I rotate/swap the offsite backup with the 2nd onsite backup weekly, to keep things constantly up to date. I feel like I could even do a little more; it is recommended to have all files and backups in at least two media formats, e.g. hard drives AND burned to DVD discs, or something similar to the idea. Additionally, I think my offsite backup could probably be a little more secure, but, I think I am still in the small percent of people with any kind of backup plan like this.

Personally, I'm putting more and more stuff in Google Drive ("the cloud")

I am doing this for all of my documents, spreadsheets, notes, etc (and on a weekly basis, I do a complete export/download of all of my Google Drive docs, and back that up with my photos). I personally believe that cloud backup of photo files is not a usable solution in general, because of the sheer amount of data / file sizes, difficulty in updating modified files, and cost / time needed to download/retrieve all of said data in the event that something catastrophic happens to your physical copies (of course the offsite and multiple backup plan I have is excellent security against that problem)

Well, I still have some thinking to do, because it seems there are strong points on both sides of the idea to join or not join Adobe CC. I believe the option to join the photoshop/lr only plan at the discounted price is available until the end of the month for people which already own CS6 (but ends tomorrow for people who do not).

[xpatUSA]

Well, I still have some thinking to do, because it seems there are strong points on both sides of the idea to join or not join Adobe CC. I believe the option to join the photoshop/lr only plan at the discounted price is available until the end of the month for people which already own CS6 (but ends tomorrow for people who do not).

My own philosophy, as a rank amateur completely disinterested in the latest gimmicks for anything, is to consider the camera+lenses, the computer+HD+OS, the internet connection, the conversion software, the post-processing software and the means of viewing as one complete set of matching entities. This is why I stick with what I have - because it all works well together (is the buzz-word synergistically?).

Any upgrade within the above would have an undesirable ripple effect, IMHO.

For example: if ever I did think of "going CC" (heaven forbid), my satellite internet connection, which can go as low 2-3Kb/sec (yep), would not support it. If I lusted after the latest Sigma DLSR, its 48MB megafiles would be a right pain on my old, slow, Windows XP desktop and would quickly use up my 350GB backup drive.

Wayland had a long thread running here seeking viable alternatives to Adobe's offerings: might be worth a look . . .

Viable alternatives to Photoshop.
.

[John Morton]

This is indeed an ongoing controversy which I am sure Adobe would love to see just "go away." I am perpetually one of those who has decided that I will seek out other options to Adobe products; and primarily because I don't want to have my photo editing computer endlessly tied to the Internet.

I was talking with my wife just the other night about our early experiences with personal computers; how I remembered loading WordPerfect from a 5.25" floppy disk into the computer's RAM and then removing that disk to insert a blank floppy where the files I was working on were actively stored. There were rumours at the time of desktop models that actually had a 10 megabyte hard drive right inside the machine! Wow!

By the time I started using Aldus PhotoStyler, hard drives were the norm and RAM was itself being measured in megabytes. No sign of the Internet as of yet, though; that came a long a few years later; so I have always been using my personal computer and its programs discretely, and don't really subscribe to the Internet model where the system defines the use parameters of the tool. If I am primarily using my personal computer to produce print media, then Internet connectivity is a secondary concern for me and one best relegated to a secondary, expendable computer.

Truth be told, I get along just fine with Photoshop CS4 Extended. I was going to upgrade when I replaced my photo editing computer with a 64 bit operating system model (probably at the end of the year) and buy the latest version of Photoshop outright (I am a little tired of loading all the upgrades from version 7 on each time I switch to a new computer) but now instead I will switch to a different photo editing package. The core functionality of Photoshop is what I am mainly interested in, and I run a lot of plug-ins to enhance that anyway; so, having new versions constantly updated for me to deal with isn't a very strong selling point for me.

And of course, as I have stated over and over, it seems to me just a basic "best practices" standard that one's digital files are isolated from the Internet to safeguard their integrity. I always hear lots of elaborate procedures designed to insure Internet connectivity while maintaining file integrity but, truth be told, all the professionals in IT agree that isolating a computer from the Internet is the best practice for keeping malware and viruses out of a system. It is also the simplest solution, and I have no desire to bend over backwards (or in any other direction) to accommodate Adobe's new subscription-only business model.

People seem to think, "Oh it is inevitable and Adobe doesn't have any real competition" but in fact they do; and it will only grow from this point on. I am already giving serious thought to replacing InDesign with Quark Xpress, which has been rather stunningly updated to give Adobe a run for the desktop publishing market. I expect Photoshop will become easier to replace too, and in the not very distant future.

[shreds]

When you start your business, you seem to forget that the tax man is your friend!! All such expenses can normally be claimed as part of the business expenses, so you will be in a far better position than the amateur using this software, coupled with the ability to dip into other parts of the suite to say, create your website or publish stuff.

I haven't seen many true professionals moaning about the move. Keeping up to date and accessing stuff ready to produce material for clients is far more valuable than moaning about the cost of the software. Sure it has been a major change of emphasis from Adobes' point of view, but probably one that long term will see them gain.

I once went to a talk where the audience were asked for a show of hands of legit and registered software. Remarkably few. So do you think that Adobe cares too much about these non professional users who don't pay anyway?

Their recent data loss to me is much more serious.

Incidentally do you think the same about paying for electricity as you do about subscription based PS?

Oh and there are plenty of alternatives to PS already, market leaders no, but better than PS6…yes in a limited number of cases. But not necessarily cheaper and probably less all encompassing. I use whatever is best for the job.

[Bobobird]

What is done is done. No amount of words here is going to change it.

Anyone have the link to the $10 offer?

I thought it was price-rise resistant but apparently not.

[Colin Southern]

I am perpetually one of those who has decided that I will seek out other options to Adobe products; and primarily because I don't want to have my photo editing computer endlessly tied to the Internet.

Why would your PC need to be "endlessly tied to the internet"?

[John Morton]

Why would your PC need to be "endlessly tied to the internet"?

Why it doesn't, Colin - I don't subscribe to Adobe's Creative Cloud line of products.

Can't help but notice, in my Inbox on my Internet computer, I am receiving on an almost daily basis marketing emails from Scot Kelby and Colin Smith for their various lines of Adobe training products. Use to see those about once a month; so I guess that, while professional users are flocking to Adobe's Creative Cloud (I guess; apparently), more casual users are not: and, as a result the huge stable of "Photoshop Gurus" are finding ever fewer of the converted to pitch and preach their insights toward. Looks like tougher times for Mr. Kelby and friends ahead, which is a little sad since after all they were the foremost promoters of Adobe products on the planet, with Kelby often ranked as the top-selling (and all around most popular) author of computer training materials.

Can't help but think that Abode doesn't have much time for the common user if this is the fate awaiting its main supporters.

[FootLoose]

Anyone have the link to the $10 offer?

.

http://www.adobe.com/au/products/cre...l?semcmpg=true

[The Blue Boy]

I've just gone with this offer. I'm very happy with it, apart from the glitch (See my other thread)

I really don't understand the negativity that this has brought on.

I can only see the plus side; I get regular updates of ACR, Bridge and PS.

Seriously, what's not to like?

Apart from Lightroom?