| Moderated by: chrisbet, | Page:   1 2 3 4   |
|
|||||||
| Another thought on Photoshop CC - Page 2 | |
| Rate Topic |
| Author | Post |
|---|
| Posted: Wed Jun 5th, 2013 17:25 |
|
11th Post |
jk
|
Well if I was in USA at present I would start to look at the special deals and end of line sales at EggHead, CompUSA, MicroCentre and the like so I could get a cheap extra copy of CS6. In fact if any one in USA sees a cheap copy about $150 then please buy one for me ! I will send money to you by PayPal.
____________________ Still learning after all these years! https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none |
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Thu Jun 6th, 2013 13:06 |
|
12th Post |
TomOC
|
Ed- I agree that it is the best all-in-one app, but there are a growing number of apps that do specific things better, if not as conveniently, and Adobe runs the risk of losing so much market share to them that they go into a spiral that takes them out of the game...
____________________ Tom O'Connell -Lots of people talk to animals.... Not very many listen, though.... That's the problem. Benjamin Hoff, The Tao of Pooh |
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Thu Jun 6th, 2013 13:43 |
|
13th Post |
Ed Matusik
|
I'm sure there are many software developers striving to upset Adobe's market position and reputation, but, at least for me, I'll wait to replace what I know works best until the remarks made for alternative software are along the lines of, "works better than Adobe and doesn't require a lifetime subscriptiuon." And, oh yes, there aren't any prolonged copyright suits against the top competitor.
|
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Thu Jun 6th, 2013 16:00 |
|
14th Post |
TomOC
|
Ed- I didn't state it clearly... There already are apps that do specific tasks better than adobe, just not all in one app, so not as conveniently. So already, the subscription is for convenience not better quality.
____________________ Tom O'Connell -Lots of people talk to animals.... Not very many listen, though.... That's the problem. Benjamin Hoff, The Tao of Pooh |
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Thu Jun 6th, 2013 17:12 |
|
15th Post |
Robert
|
This is the wheel coming full circle I think. I remember in the early days having several word processors, each had their strengths and weaknesses. It was common to open a document in each application to do specific aspects of the process, then eventually into Pagemaker to send for printing. The trouble is Adobe have been buying up these specialised software houses and incorporating each as a 'new' feature of Photoshop over the years. Not just Adobe, all the big names have been doing it. Bibble has just been sucked up by Corel and then they have ruined it stopped further development. I think we should be supporting the small specialised software producers, that may encourage or enable them to stay independent. Once they are sucked up they become embedded and lost to us unless we pay the ransom to Adobe. Ransom it is because few if any of us would voluntarily upgrade any of our software at each and every update. Most of us find every other or even every third release quite sufficient because many of the added features like for example content aware fill, we already have from the independent developer who created it, before Adobe snapped it up to enhance their next 'upgrade'. If you didn't upgrade at every update then the new regime will be very much more expensive, like about 3 times more I think. (I haven't done the math) If you did upgrade every time then I think there may be a slight saving. The plus side is of course you are always using the very latest software with constant updates. The question is how often do you actually use these 'new features' and are they relevant to your needs. Because if you are not using all the new features then you are paying the higher price for nothing.
____________________ Robert. |
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Thu Jun 6th, 2013 17:17 |
|
16th Post |
TomOC
|
Robert- That's exactly what makes me nuts. I would skip lots of upgrades except for the required raw codes in ACR...but after this last debacle, I found there are lots of raw converters that are much quicker to upgrade than adobe and some of them are actually significantly better... So why upgrade at all?
____________________ Tom O'Connell -Lots of people talk to animals.... Not very many listen, though.... That's the problem. Benjamin Hoff, The Tao of Pooh |
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Thu Jun 6th, 2013 17:41 |
|
17th Post |
Robert
|
Well yes of course RAW conversion is very important to us. I don't know where we are with the Nikon software which is what we *should* be using. last I heard it was slow and worse on a Mac. That was where Bibble was always supreme, they prided themselves on being early to the party with the RAW converters for the latest cameras. Presumably that is no longer the case. That is what you get with independent software. corporations are too slow and cumbersome They have to have so many meetings to justify middle management existence that by the time they act all the customers have gone elsewhere.
____________________ Robert. |
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Fri Jun 7th, 2013 02:30 |
|
18th Post |
jk
|
TomOC wrote: Robert- Interesting comment Tom. Which ones have you found?. It might be useful for us to pool our knowledge here as then it is easy for other to make choices that fit their needs. I personally have the following available for use: Bibble5/Aftershot Pro PhaseOne Capture Pro 7 Lightroom 4.4 ACR 7.4 (dont need the latest 8.1 as it offers support for cameras that I dont have/use) Acorn Editor Apple Aperture Ichikawa SilkyPix RAW Converter. In addition if you are on Mac and Windows OSes then these have a rudimentary RAW converter in as well that is linked to some software. I know that there are some others available that I have tested, but I dont personally use any more, such as: Corel PaintShop Pro x12 AccuRAW DCRAW
____________________ Still learning after all these years! https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none |
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Fri Jun 7th, 2013 07:32 |
|
19th Post |
Ed Matusik
|
Robert wrote: Well yes of course RAW conversion is very important to us. I don't know where we are with the Nikon software which is what we *should* be using. last I heard it was slow and worse on a Mac. I thought about NIK software too Robert, but didn't they just sell something to Google? I have the original Capture, but never bothered to upgrade to the current version. By the way, Adobe has Lightroom on its list of downloads for CC. We haven't downloaded anything from the CC site yet, as we have CS6 Production Premium on our computer and for the time being, it's identical to what's on the cloud site. I'd be interested to see if putting together an aggregate of separate software offerings for various companies is price-competitive to just subscribing to Adobe's Photoshop on the cloud. Also, how much learning and trial and error would it take to concatenate separate programs to give the identical result from photoshop? P.S., I do regularly upgrade my windows codec from Nikon's site so I can see NEF files even with Microsoft image software.
|
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Fri Jun 7th, 2013 14:24 |
|
20th Post |
Eric
|
TomOC wrote:Robert- Hate to say so, but I have been banging on for ages about this. Why upgrade from a software package that does MORE than most of us ever need? I have operated professionally with CS3 since it came out. I have CS6 on the same computer but I invariably go to the devil I know. Familiarity with your software is far more important than having the latest bells and whistles. Sorry...it's a mugs game chasing upgrades when you don't fully utilise the package you have. The ONLY reason for upgrading CS (apart from any speed improvement) is to keep ACR compatibility....which is a feeble reason, borne of Adobe greed. So I am all for using an independent raw converter...but then work in CS.
____________________ Eric |
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| This is topic ID = 635 Current time is 10:29 | Page: 1 2 3 4 | |
| Nikon DSLR Forums > The Image Processing and Editing Forums > Software for Image Processing > Another thought on Photoshop CC | Top | |
Users viewing this topic |
||
Current theme is Modern editor
| A small amount of member data is captured and held in an attempt to reduce spammers and to manage users. This site also uses cookies to ensure ease of use. In order to comply with new DPR regulations you are required to agree/disagree with this process. If you do not agree then please email the Admins using info@nikondslr.uk Thank you. |
Hosted by Octarine Services
UltraBB 1.173 Copyright © 2008-2025 Data 1 Systems
Page processed in 0.0680 seconds (66% database + 34% PHP). 85 queries executed.
UltraBB 1.173 Copyright © 2008-2025 Data 1 Systems
Page processed in 0.0680 seconds (66% database + 34% PHP). 85 queries executed.