The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Photoshop goes subscription only

gazwas

Active member
Well I've given my last penny to Adobe with PS CS6 as future versions of the creative suit goes subscription only and CS6 will no longer be updated!

Nice work Adobe - never will I be forced to pay monthly for software. Your one version upgrade was bad enough but this is too much.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Agree. I will not buy a subscription either. Looks like CS6 creative suite will be on my computers a long time. I have a couple adjectives for them but will be a nice guy for now.
 

robertwright

New member
There is a serious issue here because Camera Raw updates are never backwards compatible- newer updates usually require a newer version of Ps. Its a kind of hostage taking of our images in my opinion. I know there are alternatives, but Ps is kind of like a carpenters hammer- hard to be without.

I hope the twitters push back heavy. At least unbundle Camera Raw updates and make them backwards compatible so that when the 5Dmk whatever comes out and someone buys it they then won't be required to subscribe just to see their Raw files.
 

MGrayson

Subscriber and Workshop Member
Sorry to cross post, but this sounds like a quick cash grab. So many people are talking of upgrading to CS6, that a natural move on Adobe's part is to wait a few months, then apologize and re-offer the old purchase method. They make a killing, and their victims.. er.. customers are grateful.

And if Camera Raw is unbundled, what's to say it won't go back to the cloud next month? Adobe has lost credibility.

--Matt
 

gazwas

Active member
There is a serious issue here because Camera Raw updates are never backwards compatible- newer updates usually require a newer version of Ps. Its a kind of hostage taking of our images in my opinion. I know there are alternatives, but Ps is kind of like a carpenters hammer- hard to be without.
RAW processing in PS is painfully slow and there are much better alternatives on the market. I personally only upgraded from CS3 for the background save option as there is very little if anything else in CS6 worth upgrading for.

Now Adobe has taken my choice away to upgrade and pay the money or be happy whit what I'm using option, coupled with the dev team seem to have totally run out of steam inventing new features I'm going remain on CS6 indefinitely.

I'm not going to complain, tweet, email poke or post my dissatisfaction to Adobe but instead under its current subscription mind set I'll keep quiet happy that they will never see a penny from me again and I hope people follow and show Adobe who's really in charge.

Digital download only I'm ok with (AKA Apple Mac App store) but subscription software.....? meh!
 

D&A

Well-known member
There is a serious issue here because Camera Raw updates are never backwards compatible- newer updates usually require a newer version of Ps. Its a kind of hostage taking of our images in my opinion. I know there are alternatives, but Ps is kind of like a carpenters hammer- hard to be without.

I hope the twitters push back heavy. At least unbundle Camera Raw updates and make them backwards compatible so that when the 5Dmk whatever comes out and someone buys it they then won't be required to subscribe just to see their Raw files.
+1 I suspect for many of us, continual upgrades to later versions of Adobe CS was simply or often primarily due to having the ability to obtain the latest Camera RAW updates which were necessary for recently released cameras. Case in point, the Nikon D800/e were some of the last cameras to be included in the Camera RAW updates for CS5 and if someone obtained a Nikon D600, they then had to upgrade to CS6 in order to have Camera Raw ability with that camera. Adobe simply wouldn't make updates for Camera Raw after a certain point with newly released cameras for previosu versions of CS.

As far as I could see, adding cameras like the Nikon D600 to the Camera Raw of CS5 had nothing to do with the CS5 engine specifically but was simply a way to force many to upgrade to CS6.

So I suspect Adobe may be banking on individuals who obtain new cameras that will only work with the latest versions of Camera RAW and future versions "only" of Adobe CS, will feel they have no other choice but to move to their subscription model. If they stay with their current CS6, then new cameras they might not use, will have to use a RAW converter from another source...but won't be able to use Adobe Camera RAW, unless they un-bundle Camera RAW and make updating it available separately.

Dave (D&A)
 

Oren Grad

Active member
I suspect for many of us, continual upgrades to later versions of Adobe CS was simply or often primarily due to having the ability to obtain the latest Camera RAW updates which were necessary for recently released cameras.
That has certainly been true for me, though the latest ACR has some useful improvements beyond compatibility with the latest cameras. But as for functionality within Photoshop itself, CS3 was already more than I need.
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
I hardly touch Photoshop anymore, 99% of all my image processing runs through Lightroom 4 and, if I need spot touch ups or effects, into Snapseed or Flare. If those didn't do the job, I'd get Photoshop Elements if I didn't already have PSCS5.

Lightroom is not part of the Creative Suite so it should continue to be offered standalone ... and it solves the "keeping up to date on raw processing support" business nicely.

My needs are simple, LR is the only Adobe product I use with any regularity now. I know that not everyone can do the same as I.

However, if I do need the Creative Suite for some serious project that I couldn't do otherwise, I'd have no problem opening a subscription to the Creative Suite Cloud (or whatever they call it) for however long I needed it, then closing the subscription. Seems a fair savings to me, as I'd only be paying for it when I needed it and I would always have the latest, full suite of tools at my disposal. Without having to put out $1500 in a lump for a lot of stuff I only use very occasionally.

G
 

olaf

New member
The triumph of the bean counters. A strange thing happens in some very large companies. They start believing their own publicity. The corporate ego swells, they think they are invincible and they start to take their customers for granted. Phase One Capture Pro 7 is 229 Euros and Aperture is £55. Adobe have lost the plot. Rather than be forced to follow their business model I'll alter my workflow with a competitive product and use CS6 only when necessary.

Unless you are a large scale operator locked in to numerous Adobe software products, this is a stupid decision.

Olaf

Olaf Willoughby creative explorations in photography
 

Ben Rubinstein

Active member
I already stuck with CS5 as I don't like the new 2012 process in ACR 7. My 5D3 is supported in CS5's ACR. As I don't see myself updating for many years anyway I can happily ignore all this nonsense and by the time I'm back in the market, the competitors will have eaten Adobe's lunch. As for the rest of the features, let's face it, PS has had very little updated in a long while....
 

gazwas

Active member
As for the rest of the features, let's face it, PS has had very little updated in a long while....
No, the dark background application frame (Mac) and blur gimmick, I mean filter gallery is well worth the £20 per month subscription (sarcastic smiley).

For as long as I've shot digital (1999), I never used ACR in PS as there has always been something better at RAW conversion/DAM. I don't understand why people buy PS for this main feature?

The sooner people realise ACR is an add on to PS and software exists that do equal or better conversions (eg. Lightroom, Capture One etc) then the sooner Adobe might start to give a damn about something other than its customers wallets.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
ACR has and always will be a kludge to work with and a shity general purpose raw converter. C1 by far has smoked it on every camera files I have compared it to. THAT'S EVERYONE. Okay I'm bias towards C1 always have been. Sue me. LOL

My biggest issue is the rest of the suite . I use InDesign. Not much I could turn too outside of Quark which sucks.the biggest problem for me is design and of course manipulating files that C1 can't do. Today I used DXO viewpoint to correct some 14mm shots neither C1 nor Photoshop could fix the diagonal distortion. I could buy it in a stand alone version but than I need other stand alone software as well. But again I will not go monthly with them on any terms. I've been screwed by Adobe more than once having 2 legit Adobe programs and can't upgrade to a creative suite. That right there pissed me off to no end. I spent a ton on InDesign and PS and that was not enough for a package upgrade to a suite. Screw them

This WILL bite them in the ***.
 

gazwas

Active member
This WILL bite them in the ***.
+1

I read a little about the new Photoshop CC and the "main" feature they are plugging is an image stabilisation filter that corrects for camera shake?

And I always thought PS was a pro app but it seems Adobe want to turn it into iPhoto - insane!
Why Adobe, would I want to subscribe if all you give us are theses lame *** gimmicky new features?

Well get a beach scene, green screen gallery next. :ROTFL:
 
V

Vivek

Guest
I read a little about the new Photoshop CC and the "main" feature they are plugging is an image stabilisation filter that corrects for camera shake?

And I always thought PS was a pro app but it seems Adobe want to turn it into iPhoto - insane!
Why Adobe, would I want to subscribe if all you give us are theses lame *** gimmicky new features?
Almost ALL features that PS has can be classified as gimmicks in one sense or the other.

The stabilisation filter is a very powerful tool. What it will be used for and how well would separate the men from the boys, so to say. It can be amateurish, yes.

While I agree that this new cloud crap is not a good development, let us not turn this in to bashing any new features without knowing what they can be used for.
 

tjv

Active member
Is there any word of student or educator subscription discounts?

This cloud madness could be the death nail for me and Adobe. As far as I'm concerned, if I've paid for a software license outright or subscribed and paid an equivalent price over a period of time, I should be able to cancel my subscription, forego the updates, and still use the software as it exists at that moment. To lose usage rights outright would be just plain infuriating.
 

Bob

Administrator
Staff member
This seems the way things are going in general for software vendors.
There is a bit good
and a bit bad.
First the good:
The subscription model is a much smaller investment for new users who might find only occasional need for some of the more esoteric programs. Looking back on what I have paid for upgrades over the last few years, this will save me a small amount of money.
From the software developer point of view, it prevents the marketing push for regular "significant" upgrades to keep the revenue stream running and thus their employment.

The bad:
Folks that are not entering this from scratch have already purchased a bunch of stuff and feel that there is an on-going implicit commitment to keep supporting what they bought in the past forever. Frankly that is just not economically possible given that stuff changes, cameras, image processing technology, underlying operating systems and so forth. There is just not enough revenue unless folks buy support agreements. Support agreements have been tried and have failed.

I have to admit I signed up since there was a couple bits of the suite that I needed but was just too expensive to buy.
Now I have acces to it at essentially no more cost than keeping up with revisions to photoshop, illustrator, dreamweaver, and acrobat pro.

Bottom line is that at least for me it will save some small money.
-bob
 
Top