Does Adobe's new subscription only affect you?


Recommended Posts

Well, i've been a photoshop user since around 2005ish, lightroom user since 2008, my pickle is, you need a new version for adobe ACR every time a new camera comes out, now granted I don't upgrade my dSLRS ever year, but still, i won't shell out $50 a month for the latest and greatest adobes CC. I initially got photoshop as a free from a pre-built computer that included a basic software suite/kit, so i've been trickle upgrading whenever I could, Now I think i'll be stuck on CS 6 forever until I buy a new camera that requires me to find an alternative.

The only workaround I've found, is just not shoot raw, but that kinda defeats the purpose for me...

I fear the subscription model is going to work great for the companies with multiple users, but gonna suck for us small guys. I haven't tried the new model yet but it looks like I'm going to have to whether I want to or not.

I will agree that it does in fact suck for the small guy and small company, however, Adobe has made it clear several times in the past that they generally just care about the larger customers rather than the smaller ones.

I fear the subscription model is going to work great for the companies with multiple users, but gonna suck for us small guys. I haven't tried the new model yet but it looks like I'm going to have to whether I want to or not.

I will agree that it does in fact suck for the small guy and small company, however, Adobe has made it clear several times in the past that they generally just care about the larger customers rather than the smaller ones.

Yeah, but a bunch of little guys make up something big in the end eg "there are no small customers", but there's no going back it seems, my only hope is that there revenue falls like crazy the first year or two, that way they will be forced to return to the previous model.

Worked out great for me. If anyone uses it for "work" its a great deal. Now for regular users who only use photoshop to edit their own photos for personal use and small things like that, then its not worth it at all.

Yeah, I don't live off photography/design, so I fall in that group :/

Since I only use Lightroom it hardly affects me. As long as they don't do it for Lightroom I guess I'll be fine with it. Or well, if the price in the end turns out to be the same as just buying new releases whenever they get released I probably will subscribe.

Since I only use Lightroom it hardly affects me. As long as they don't do it for Lightroom I guess I'll be fine with it. Or well, if the price in the end turns out to be the same as just buying new releases whenever they get released I probably will subscribe.

Lightroom depends from camera raw ( ACR), so when you buy a new camera, if you shoot raw, you're going to be screwed, because you will only be able to update if you subscribe.

Lightroom depends from camera raw ( ACR), so when you buy a new camera, if you shoot raw, you're going to be screwed, because you will only be able to update if you subscribe.

True, though Lightroom isn't too expensive. If you shoot RAW and can get yourself a new camera you can probably afford Lightroom too. It's probably just as important as the camera itself in making sure your photos look good.

True, though Lightroom isn't too expensive. If you shoot RAW and can get yourself a new camera you can probably afford Lightroom too. It's probably just as important as the camera itself in making sure your photos look good.

you misunderstood, lightroom will keep working, but to get the ACR plugin that makes it "recognize" the new cameras raw file, comes in CS6... heck adobe themselves stated they don't know what they're going to do with this particular situation.

It doesn't effect me at all (now). I just bought CS6 a year ago to replace a questionably acquired copy of CS2. Given that I can't even be bothered to upgrade my "trial" copy, I doubt I'll be looking at upgrading from CS6 for ~ 7 years.

Of course, come 2020, I'll be ****ed. I'm already thinking about buying Pixelmator for a fallback.

It doesn't effect me at all (now). I just bought CS6 a year ago to replace a questionably acquired copy of CS2. Given that I can't even be bothered to upgrade my "trial" copy, I doubt I'll be looking at upgrading from CS6 for ~ 7 years.

Of course, come 2020, I'll be ****ed. I'm already thinking about buying Pixelmator for a fallback.

Wow long vision into 2020 :p

you misunderstood, lightroom will keep working, but to get the ACR plugin that makes it "recognize" the new cameras raw file, comes in CS6... heck adobe themselves stated they don't know what they're going to do with this particular situation.

That's what I meant. If you can afford a fancy new camera you can afford a Lightroom upgrade too if you really need it (because it's not really the most expensive software, especially not if you take into account what you can do with it).

Worked out great for me. If anyone uses it for "work" its a great deal. Now for regular users who only use photoshop to edit their own photos for personal use and small things like that, then its not worth it at all.

+1. Works out well for me too, I earn a living from Adobe software (Photoshop/Illustrator/InDesign) and usually always upgraded to the latest "design premium" collection which was about ?700 every 16 months, creative cloud gives me the latest version of the entire adobe suite for the same cost. This is also excluding the fact that if you own Mac/Windows systems you can use the same creative cloud subscription on both operating systems giving you higher savings.

I don't really see the problem, if you're only using Photoshop as a hobby either:

  1. Stick with the version you've got
  2. Pay $200 / year ('single app' creative cloud subscription) for the latest version which still makes it cheaper than most hobbies
  3. Switch to something else

I'm not surprised Adobe are making this move, presumably in an attempt to reduce piracy, the amount of people using pirated adobe software is ridiculous.

I think the problem with Adobe and piracy is that the people who pirate it don't do it because they don't use all of the functionality, but just because they don't use Adobe software all the time, just on those few days when it really comes in handy. Aside Lightroom I don't really use any paid Adobe software a lot, but I always have a Photoshop trial installed. I usually format my PC every three months and the 30-day trial pretty much always covers the days when Photoshop comes in handy. I've tried alternatives (I probably have all free stuff installed on my pc), and while it's nice for most things you just can't do proper things with it once you need a bit more advanced functionality...

People who think this will reduce piracy are totally delusional. The program will still be running locally which means you install it on your local computer and will check activation every month. What you need to do is to patch the binary which does the activation check and then you are again back in the gain. I don't see any big change than currently what we have adobe activation method. The only way it will be hard to circumvent the protection is if the whole program runs on a server. This is pure greed from adobe's part to milk their existing customer or professionals who have no other better alternative.

I was under the empression that updates would continue to be provided.

I think this seems to suggest so?

"Because Adobe is still selling Photoshop CS6, those customers will continue to receive updated camera raw file format compatibility via Adobe Camera Raw 8. When we update ACR8 with new camera support, Photoshop CS6 customers can work with the new version of the Camera Raw plug-in." Source

This change really makes me mad. I was finally considering buying it for the first time next year (since I don't use it very much and always had other ways of getting a copy; not necessarily downloading it), but now that's not going to happen. I always chose not to buy it because, as Ambroos pointed out, I don't use it enough to actually buy it. A friend's old copy always worked well enough for me. So from me, it's not like Adobe was actually losing out on any money. Now there's no way I'm going to spend $50 a month to edit 50-100 photos a month.

I guess I'll keep my CS6 installation, which I just got to replace my CS4 install, as long as I can and then go from there.

More importantly to me, I was thinking of ditching Aperture for Lightroom, but now I'm afraid of what they'll do with LR... so those plans are out the window. I use Aperture every day, so that's something important to me. Either way, I wouldn't pay $50 a month for Aperture or LR.

People who think this will reduce piracy are totally delusional. The program will still be running locally which means you install it on your local computer and will check activation every month. What you need to do is to patch the binary which does the activation check and then you are again back in the gain. I don't see any big change than currently what we have adobe activation method. The only way it will be hard to circumvent the protection is if the whole program runs on a server. This is pure greed from adobe's part to milk their existing customer or professionals who have no other better alternative.

Obviously it will still be cracked, but I disagree that it won't reduce piracy. At the moment there is quite a high percentage of freelancers who, even though they earn a living using the software (photographers, designers, etc.) and $50 / month is nothing to them, use pirated versions of the Adobe suite because it's so easy. Once every 18 months download the trial for the latest adobe suite, stick in a serial number and you're set for the next 16 months, you can even get stability updates directly from Adobe using the updater, no differences to a legit copy, no unknown/modified executables.

The cloud copies don't have distinct versions anymore (well, won't soon), it solely relies on incremental updates to each of the applications and with a cracked cloud version you're not going to be able to get automatic updates because the updater will require authentication. This means every month when Adobe releases stability updates / feature updates you're going to need to, assuming the release groups even bother, manually find/download/install updates and hope there isn't any 'additional' files hidden in the patches.

IMO it's enough of a hassle/deterrent to convert a small percentage, even 2% would give Adobe an extra $10 million/month based on the pirated numbers.

So from me, it's not like Adobe was actually losing out on any money. Now there's no way I'm going to spend $50 a month to edit 50-100 photos a month.

It's $20/month for a single app if you only need Photoshop. If you still can't justify spending that, then use something else? Photoshop is a luxury, not a right.

I think it will reduce it. Somewhat anyway. Of course people who pirate will do so regardless.

It will DEFINITELY reduce piracy, i've pirated photoshop for years but jumped on CC the moment it became available, i've been a happy paying customer for a year now, i'm against the new monthly sub option route every company appears to be taking these days but for CC i can make an exception because it's worth every penny...

If i was to make one suggestion i'd love different payment plans either quarterly or yearly.

Only concern is not owning the physical software, the moment we can't pay or decide to stop paying if work dries up or illness or retirement or whatever then your lifes work is gone because you can't run software to open your files anymore.

It's $20/month for a single app if you only need Photoshop. If you still can't justify spending that, then use something else? Photoshop is a luxury, not a right.

Get off your high horse. Basically everything computer related is a luxury, not a right. I'm not going to pay a service fee when most of the features I use are in other applications. So yea, I won't be using photoshop for much longer.

Being in the creative industry it's hard to avoid Adobe... there will be requirements somewhere or someone else will send though a CS file. On one hand I think Adobe will lose a lot of customers because they'll just stick with the last boxed version being CS6, but in the long run, given the pretty approachable monthly subscription price (arguable, but I think so anyways), eventually most people will be on board.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • One of the strangest galaxies in our Universe could help answer some long overdue questions by Sayan Sen Image by Pixabay via Pexels | Not representative An international team of astronomers led by the Department of Astronomy at Tsinghua University has discovered an unusually metal-poor galaxy that may contain signs of first-generation star formation. The galaxy, named Metal-Pristine Galaxy COSMOS Redshift 3 (MPG-CR3), or CR3, was identified using observations from the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST), the Very Large Telescope (VLT), and the Subaru Telescope. The findings, published in The Astrophysical Journal Letters, describe CR3 as the most metal-poor galaxy known from the period known as "cosmic noon," around 11.5 billion years ago. Cosmic noon refers to a period when the universe was producing stars at its highest rate and galaxies were growing rapidly. In astronomy, "metals" refers to all elements heavier than helium, including oxygen, carbon, and iron. Because CR3 contains so few of these heavier elements, researchers say it closely resembles what scientists expect the earliest galaxies in the universe may have looked like. The discovery is significant because it could offer clues about Population III (Pop III) stars, the first generation of stars thought to have formed after the Big Bang. These stars are believed to have formed from gas made almost entirely of hydrogen and helium, before heavier elements were created inside stars and spread across the universe through supernova explosions. Hence this is why CR3 has been referred to as a "living fossil." Scientists have long believed that Population III stars existed only in the very early universe. As more generations of stars formed and died, they enriched surrounding gas with heavier elements, making the conditions needed for metal-free star formation increasingly rare. Because of this, researchers expected the formation of such stars to have largely ended after the epoch of reionization, a period when radiation from the first stars and galaxies transformed the neutral hydrogen filling the universe and made it largely transparent to ultraviolet light. CR3 appears to challenge that idea. The galaxy was observed at a redshift of z = 3.193 ± 0.016. Redshift measures how much light from a distant object has been stretched as the universe expands and helps astronomers determine how far back in time they are looking. In this case, the redshift corresponds to roughly 11.5 billion years ago during cosmic noon. Although the universe was already several billion years old by that point, CR3 shows characteristics more commonly associated with much earlier galaxies. Observations revealed exceptionally strong emissions from hydrogen and helium, including Lyα, Hα, and He I λ10830. Lyα, or Lyman-alpha emission, is a specific wavelength of light produced by hydrogen and is widely used to study distant galaxies. Hα emission is another hydrogen signature commonly used to trace active star formation, while He I λ10830 is produced by helium and can indicate the presence of very hot, young stars. The measured equivalent widths of EW₀(Lyα) = 822 ± 101 Å and EW₀(Hα) = 2814 ± 327 Å are among the highest ever observed in star-forming galaxies. Equivalent width is a measure of the strength of an emission line relative to the surrounding light, and such large values are typically associated with intense and very recent star formation. At the same time, researchers found no statistically significant detections of metal emission lines, including [O III] λλ4959, 5007 and C IV λλ1548, 1550. Emission lines act as chemical fingerprints that reveal which elements are present in a galaxy. Oxygen and carbon lines are commonly seen in galaxies that have already undergone significant chemical enrichment. Their absence in CR3 suggests an unusually pristine environment. Using abundance calibration methods developed with JWST observations, the team placed a 2σ upper limit on the galaxy's gas-phase metallicity of 12+log(O/H)<6.52, corresponding to less than 0.7% of the Sun's metallicity (Z < 7 × 10⁻³ Z⊙). Gas-phase metallicity measures the abundance of heavy elements in a galaxy's gas. A 2σ upper limit indicates that the true value is very unlikely to be higher than the quoted threshold. Even when accounting for uncertainties in the calibration methods, the most conservative limit remains 12+log(O/H)<6.95, making CR3 the most metal-poor galaxy identified at cosmic noon. The galaxy also appears to contain very little dust. Researchers measured a Lyα/Hα flux ratio of 13.9 ± 2.5, a result that suggests negligible dust attenuation, meaning very little of the galaxy's light is being absorbed or scattered by cosmic dust. Because dust is usually produced by earlier generations of stars, this finding further supports the idea that CR3 has experienced very little chemical enrichment. Further analysis using spectral energy distribution modelling, a technique that compares observed light with theoretical models, suggests that CR3 contains an extremely young stellar population only around 2 million years old. The modelling, which used Population III stellar templates, also indicates the galaxy has a stellar mass of approximately 6.1 × 10⁵ M⊙. The symbol M⊙ represents one solar mass, or the mass of the Sun. One of the key questions raised by the discovery is how such a chemically primitive galaxy could exist in a universe that had already spent billions of years producing heavier elements. To investigate this, the researchers examined CR3's surroundings. Their analysis suggests the galaxy may lie in a slightly underdense environment, with a density contrast of roughly δ ≈ −0.12. An underdense region contains less matter and fewer galaxies than average. The team suggests that this relative isolation may have helped preserve pockets of pristine gas. Metal-rich material expelled from nearby galaxies may never have reached CR3, while the lower rate of galaxy mergers and interactions could have slowed the mixing of enriched gas into the system. If future observations confirm these findings, CR3 could provide some of the strongest evidence yet that first-generation star formation continued well after the epoch of reionization. Such a result would challenge the conventional view that pristine star formation ended by z ≳ 6 and suggest that small pockets of metal-free gas survived much longer than previously thought. Researchers stress that more observations will be needed to determine the galaxy's true nature. Future spectroscopic studies with higher resolution and better signal quality could help confirm whether CR3 is genuinely hosting Population III star formation. The discovery is also expected to encourage searches for other similar galaxies, which could help astronomers better understand how the first stars formed and how galaxies evolved in the early universe. Source: Tsinghua University, IOPscience This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • "I think in the immediate absence of a partner to apply relief" In the words of Sterling Archer... "Phrasing!"
    • For me, the fundamental problems with these "smartglasses" is that they really don't work well for people with significant prescriptions and massively up the price if you use attached lenses if they have displays, and if they don't, then they're not actually "smart" anything, rather just connecting to your phone and relaying voice to an AI. In a few cases like this, they throw in small cameras to feed video to the AI. All around, these feel like both a solution looking for a problem, and the problems it tries to solve seem more easily solved by different approaches and designs. Oddly, if the rumours are true, Apple may actually have invented something for once and it kind of does this right: put cameras in ear buds and manage the interface to AI exactly as most of us do: tapping on an ear bud and saying "Hey Google" or "Hey Siri." That makes them compatible with almost everyone, can double up as a hearing assist device, an impaired vision assist device, a "smart" device... and answer your phone and play music. That just seems like a better solution all around.
    • Usually the bigger ones with many fixes/changes take a few, theyre an exception to the rule most likely
    • If you don’t get lucky with Valve’s Steam Machine reservation system, you can make your own Steam Machine instead. Valve says that “starting with the SteamOS 3.8 release, you can put together your own Steam Machine using whatever PC parts you want.” SteamOS 3.8.10 launched last week with a slew of updates, including “improved compatibility with recent Intel and AMD platforms.” Alongside that improved compatibility, Valve is giving gamers the green light to install SteamOS on their own desktops. In an interview with The Verge, Valve’s Pierre-Loup Griffais said Valve has been “rolling out improvements to [SteamOS] so it’s more compatible with desktop hardware,” including eventual support for Nvidia graphics. Griffais says Valve has “a growing team” working on Nvidia driver support for SteamOS, adding, “We’re collaborating with Nvidia very closely.” While he mentioned that Nvidia support might not come this year, Griffais emphasized that “it’s certainly something that we’re working on in the background.”     Subscription not needed: https://archive.fo/Tssfc Subscription needed: https://www.theverge.com/games/953411/valve-steamos-desktop-nvidia
  • Recent Achievements

    • Dedicated
      HidekoYamamoto94 earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • One Month Later
      timbobit earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      nates earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Almohandis earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Rookie
      dorf went up a rank
      Rookie
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      452
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      161
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      107
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      84
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      70
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!