You might look into the On1 RAW offering. I believe the newest versions can import your LR development settings in, as long as you are working from a fairly recent version of LR.
HTH,
cayenne
Upvote
0
Adobe testing a new price point for the Creative Cloud Photography Plan
- Thread starter ethanz
- Start date
You might look into the On1 RAW offering. I believe the newest versions can import your LR development settings in, as long as you are working from a fairly recent version of LR.
HTH,
cayenne
Upvote
0
All true, however, consider the relative in-elasticity of migrating software for most folks. $20 isn't going to be enough to push them away
Upvote
0
Here is the best response to a forced offer of 1TB cloud storage (for those who can't just cancel): as many people as possible should fill their unneeded cloud storage space with random data. I am quite sure, that Adobe thought "we'll sell them 1TB, but most will use less than 100GB", planned their hardware resources accordingly, and random data cannot be compressed either.
If enough people do this, Adobe will come scrambling "save sooo much for reducing storage to 50GB!!!"
If enough people do this, Adobe will come scrambling "save sooo much for reducing storage to 50GB!!!"
Upvote
0
More likely they would use this as an excuse to raise the price on everybody and require you to have another couple of terabytes.
Upvote
0
They are just in the process of studying, how roughly doubling the price would affect the size of their customer base. I don't think they can make a profit from supporting their software plus storing the full 1TB of pure random data at US$20/month. They can even less likely make a profit from storing a couple of TB of random data at US$40/month, and would at the same time lose almost all non-professional and most of their small scale professional customers.
This is Adobe's ultimate weakness in this game: they force you to accept an offer, which includes storage space that most people won't need. They offer this service at a price, which only works out for Adobe, if in fact only few people use up their full quota of online storage space. At the same time it costs most of us nearly nothing to fill up the 1 TB quota with garbage data. Adobe would be in deep trouble, if people followed up on this in numbers.
Upvote
0
The trouble with DPP is that, if you use several different camera brands, you'll have to use an additional development software...
Why, for Christ's sake, isn't everybody using DNG, why so many proprietary systems?
I could have kept on using LR 5.7 for life, if I hadn't bought the 5 D IV.
Upvote
0
No you can convert your 5D MkIV files to DNG for free and then still use LR5.7The trouble with DPP is that, if you use several different camera brands, you'll have to use an additional development software...
Why, for Christ's sake, isn't everybody using DNG, why so many proprietary systems?
Upvote
0
I am the only one to find it a little ironic to be talking about the advantages/uses of the DNG file format (creator: Adobe) on a thread mostly complaining about Adobe?
Upvote
0
No you aren’t, look at my posting history, I have taken a ton of flak and been labeled an Adobe apologist (that’s the politest) for pointing out that Adobe are the only software company I know of that offers a fully supported free program and format to facilitate a work around so you never have to upgrade their software.I am the only one to find it a little ironic to be talking about the advantages/uses of the DNG file format (creator: Adobe) on a thread mostly complaining about Adobe?
Meanwhile the disenfranchised will bemoan their lot in life and proclaim confirmation of my corporate shill status...
Upvote
0
I pay the full monthly subscription price and use enough of the products that the yearly total comes out to only slightly more than I was paying in annual upgrades.
But I don't want to go this route with all of my software. The next version of MacOS will break the non-64-bit apps, many of which I use all the time. The current OS warns you of them when you start them up. I may try to hold out from the OS upgrade as long as I can. But eventually I will need to find alternative solutions for music notation software and my check writing, to name two.
But I don't want to go this route with all of my software. The next version of MacOS will break the non-64-bit apps, many of which I use all the time. The current OS warns you of them when you start them up. I may try to hold out from the OS upgrade as long as I can. But eventually I will need to find alternative solutions for music notation software and my check writing, to name two.
Upvote
0
You've got to be kidding me ... that's what you took home after seven pages of forum postings?
The underlying assumption of such services and pricing models is that people don't use up their quota. People with a few hundred MB worth of data effectively subsidize power users and the whole cloud storage operation. Adobe's price calculation may work out with such a user base, but will likely blow up, if a sizable part of their user base fill up their quote with uncompressible data.
Upvote
0
What I see is:
- people who use Photoshop CC sahying an increase in price would be too much for them
- People who do not like the subscription model saying that they are abusing their market position for no other reason they are raising prices
- Some people who do not like the subscription model coming to the rather odd conclusion that what Adobe are doing is illegal
And you act as though they are the only company who do this. Almost every services company builds this into their overhead/cost calculation and would be dumb if they did not.
Upvote
0
I share your disagreement with Group 3, and you never read any statement from myself supporting this position. Group 1 may be right or not, let's wait and see how this unfolds. Group 2 is a perfectly valid concern: a price hike of 100% is not a common thing, and a clear sign of market domination.
A price hike of 100% is neither a common nor a smart thing, especially from a company already making healthy profits off the product. What Adobe offers in return for the extra cash is apparently something only few people seem to want or need or are willing to pay for. Future will show how this ends.
If you look at Microsoft, which also had an extremely dominant market position: people still put up with them on laptops and desktops, but flat out rejected their offerings in the smart phone and music player market regardless of merit. Microsoft still earns a lot of money with their server and desktop software, but unwittingly and unintentionally cut themselves off from large future markets.
Upvote
0
