Cannot update Camera Raw from 6.7 to 7.1

[Sharity84078]

When I try to update Camera Raw from 6.7 to 7.1, from the 7.1 setup file I downloaded, I get the error:

"Update failed

Updates could not be applied

This patch is not applicable for you. Please check for updates from the help menu in your product to see a list of latest updates available."

If I go to help in Photoshop CS5 and click on updates, it says that all of my programs are up to date, but Camera Raw is still 6.7. It absolutely refuses to update to 7.1

I just traded in my Nikon D3100 for a Nikon D3200 and 6.7 does not support it, but 7.1 does, so I REALLY need it to upgrade because I like to shoot in RAW.

Please help????

[cromwell99]

I don't doubt - and THIS is my point - if computer/camera/software manufacturers were made to sing from the same hymn sheet with primary regard for the consumer then these problems would be minimised.

It isn't surprising that they dont because they're out for No. 1.

It doesn't improve my humour or sense of fair play when I read trite platitudes such as: "If you wanna play you gotta pay" because it starts from the premise that the market dictates to the customer and not vice-versa.

Any thoughtful response would recognise that this is unfair.

Good luck.

[Noel Carboni]

This is the world we live in.  Last I looked "fairness" isn't part of the laws of physics.

What would you suggest?  Government regulation of the software industry?

-Noel

[cromwell99]

Exchange the use of the word "fair" for "consumer rights" - Yes, some sort of over-arching regulation is required but unless the consmers flex their brains rather than their plastic nothing will happen.

Forums like this should be more pro-active in forcing the hands of manufacturers.

[Noel Carboni]

Flex their brains...  And do what, buy software from the competiton?

Look around you, idealist.  The world is not full of people who are smart enough to build a company to compete, or they would have done so.

You're just coming across as a pouting child here.  There's a free solution provided for you already, and Adobe is doing everything in their power to provide new value in their new releases, spurring new sales.

If you want the latest technology, you have to be willing to pay for it.

I seriously doubt you get new cars or tomatoes for free either.

-Noel

[cromwell99]

Sorry I have dared to disagree with you. And I am sorry if my "idealism" should be interpreted as childish.

What would you like me to do?

You're pomposity and arrogance meanwhile is ok, I suppose.

[Noel Carboni]

You may have the last word.  I have no desire to argue.

Just bear in mind I have no great love for Adobe.  It's just that the warfront on which I prefer to fight is that of declining quality vs. business practices.

-Noel

[JP Hess]

New users of Photoshop are often caught off guard when suddenly they find that the new camera they just purchased is not supported for raw development.  Sorry people, but technology changes.  Why did you purchase a new camera, better quality, more megapixels, better burst shooting, whatever?  It has always been Adobe's policy to discontinue support for older versions of their software.  If you purchase a new camera for new features and better quality images, then you should expect to purchase new software that will accommodate all of that new technology.  It's fun to complain, and blame Adobe, and pout.  But it gets old, and annoying, and just isn't appropriate.  I know, the complainers will keep this thread going because they think they are picked on or discriminated against, and they don't think it's fair.  There is the DNG converter!  IT'S FREE!  It is a valid choice. 

Some complain that they don't want to use the DNG converter because it is an extra step that they don't want to be "forced" to use.  There are just as many (probably more) people who routinely, automatically convert to DNG because they prefer the format.  It really is time to put this little pouting session to rest.  It's not going to change anything.

[Jeff Schewe]

cromwell99 wrote:

I'm not a luddite, I have benefitted as much as anyone from the switch away from analogue but some of the changes over encoding and software features are frankly just a marketing ploy.

Actually, you are...you are still using OS X 10.5 Leopard which was released in Oct 2017 on a 5 year old Mac Pro. You didn't upgrade to Snow Leopard (your choice) and now you are totally out of the OS X loop (again, your choice). You now go buy a brand new camera and are shocked the rest of the Mac community has left you behind.

Your MacPro has been parked at 10.5 (aside from the 10.5.x updates) and now you want to upgrade your applications–that require a more modern OS and there's no easy way of doing that. Apple has fundamentally changed their OS delivery system (while you weren't paying attention I guess). The way to get either Lion or Mountain Lion is via the Apple App Store–which didn't exist until 10.6.8-which you can't "buy" any longer. Apple isn't selling Snow Leopard any more.

I understand this doesn't please you...but lashing out at Adobe will do you no good. LR4 and Photoshop CS6 require 10.6.8 or above. None of this was "secret"...(although the Lion + delivery system was a surprise to some who weren't paying attention).

Your only option is to try to find a 10.6.x installer (prolly 10.6.3), update to 10.6.8 to get the App Store and go to Mountain Lion (you could hover at 10.6.8 for a while since that's all that is required for CS6 and LR4). You can't even buy Lion any longer...

Yeah, it sucks to be in your position...but the person responsible for your position is you. You really should stay up to date on your OS and applications or at least no older than one version back. Otherwise you'll end up in the same position in the future.

Good luck fixing your mess (I actually mean that).

[IndyMcDuff]

This isn't really a reply, just a statement.

I'm wondering why you are attacking each other.  The DNG converter is free, fast, small.  So no one is left holding the bag.  I was going to wait to upgrade to CS6, but could have used the standalone converter.  I downloaded it, tried it out.  It is fast and only creates one little step.  So why are so many people moaning?

Adobe, like anyone else, still has to pay employees each month, rent, utilities, the government, etc.  So yes, they are going to try to get you to buy more.  Do you go to the supermarket and only expect to have to go once?  What is the point of crying about it?  If Adobe offered NOTHING to use to go with the new RAW formats, then that would be different.  But open your eyes!  This is happening with every bit of software out there.  In the future, you won't be able to "own" anything.  Everything will be on the cloud and you'll be renting usage.  Can't you see the writing on the wall?  Norton and so many others are trying to push you to this.  The only out is to go OFFLINE and stay offline and just use what you have.  That may work just fine until your motherboard goes and you have to buy new computers.

Look at what Adobe is offering you now...you can get the whole suite of continually updated software, not have to buy the suite...but you pay a monthly fee from here to the time you shut down your computer and walk away from it for good.  Adobe is no different than anyone else in that respect, they are all hoping to get you to do this.  So just download and use the converter.  It works.

It is going to be the same with TV here in the USA.  Eventually you will not have any basic service whatsoever.  Everything will be ala carte.  If you think you have a complaint now...I'm paying 270.00 per month for cable, cable modems, phones.  I get no premium channels, and, more importantly, no longer get any basic channels without a converter box.  That means my "basic service" that is included with the cable no longer exists.  Look at the writing on the wall.  The additional (3rd) cable box is free for the first year, then of course there will be a rental fee.  So a few of my TV's just have WD Live on them, or a BD player that includes a port for USB so I can transfer movies to it.  There is no choice given.  Even though the cable was digital and not analog, they now scramble even the free channels.  Blackmail.

If you think what Adobe has done is wrong...go check out what Norton and a ton of others are trying to do.

[Yammer]

As it's an epic, I'm not going to read the whole thread. So, apologies if this was already said.

The fault here lies squarely with the camera manufacturers. Adobe provides regular free updates for the current range of software, as well as a free tool for older software. Camera manufacturers have full access to an open standard called DNG, and some use it. If they all provided an option to store raw files as DNG, all new cameras would immediately be supported by all raw converters. End of.

But they don't. Why? Because they see a way of providing extra value in their raw formats, and are trying to protect themselves from others exploiting this. It's just 'good' business, but it's not in our interest.

[IndyMcDuff]

I must agree with you there.  The majority of my cameras are Nikon and Canon.  I haven't installed the Nikon software, but I did install the Canon software on another machine when this whole issue of not being able to read the new Canon RAW format with Adobe arose.  Much to my surprise, the Canon software that is provided with the camera did NOT allow for immediate conversion to DNG.  I suppose I'll have to install the Nikon software just to see....

But of course while the editor Canon gives you is rudimentary, the first thing that struck me was that it is try ing to sell...guess what...a subscription so that you have access to more features, storage, blah blah, and it turned my stomach.  Nowadays you can buy a 3TB external storage unit for under $200., and it is USB 3 to boot.  Tiny 1.5 TB units, $99. to @149. and they fit in your pocket.  Some have shock proof warranty's up to a five foot drop.  Some have built in encryption software.  But everyone is trying to rent space to you on their servers...and moving the juicy part of the software package onto their servers as well, all to get you to pay a monthly fee. 

The only thing consumers can do is bite the bullet and say "NO" we don't want it that way.  We're willing to do our image backups nightly and have the external storage and we do not need to pay you all monthly fees just to work.  I'm sure it will be a struggle.

This little section of whining about having to use a standalone RAW converter, which is free, is going to be moot.  The gritty struggle is going to be not having to pay monthly fees to all the vendors whose software you use.

[JP Hess]

You can install the Nikon software if you want, but I can tell you that there will be no support for DNG.  There are only a handful of companies that natively support the format.  The only one that I am aware of for sure is Pentax.  Yes, I know there are others.  But I just haven't paid close enough attention to know which ones they are.

Adobe must provide support for every new camera introduced that shoots raw images because of this territorial attitude displayed by the camera manufacturers.  I suspect this will change some day, but at the present time we (the consumers) are the ones who are being victimized.  The only thing we could do is not purchase the new cameras.  But as soon as a new one is announced countless consumers scramble to get them.  And Adobe gets the blame for not supporting them soon enough.

[Noel Carboni]

IndyMcDuff wrote:

I'm wondering why you are attacking each other.

The same scenario plays out again and again. I once even complained about it myself way back when I was naive...

1. A naive Photoshop user feels slighted that he/she had to pay the most they ever paid for a software package, then finds out that they don't get lifetime free upgrades, so they come on here and complain, assuming they'll find sympathetic ears.
   
2. While the ears actually ARE sympathetic, there's actually nothing anyone is going to do to make it better, proven by two decades of such complaints.  Adobe simply has a valuable software package that no one to this date has ever been able to compete with, and they know it.

So what you get are not attacks, but:

• Naive users with complaints, who can't believe others are siding with the big, greedy corporation.
  
• Experienced users, who grow ever more tired of hearing the complaints, providing descriptions of the reality.

Neither really likes to hear from the other.

-Noel

[MPpulido]

Thanks For your comments, affected previously, now and in the future, when upgrade their cameras, join us together to at least ask for respect and support.

That is why open source is computing strongly, Linux, g I m p are in the battle to get loyal customer because their products, and not for the "good will".

I qualify adobe products as excelents but the support and sales tactics are not with their customers.

I am going to skip 2 or 3 new releases in order to pay the same amount for CS9 upgrade as soon it will be available. But before pay the upgrade, I should be sure than my camera is supported in that version.

I am not going to pay the upgrade to release 6,7,8 no way.

BTW, it is not the money I don't like to be forced by a company that I am already his. Customer, that I already pay full price for one of the mos complete suites and just after 10 months of usage. No way.

Marco

I am containing shooting raw with my t4i, thinking in moving to a full frame 5d mark III. Editing and exporting with DFP to PS now later who knows.

[MPpulido]

As you notice, I am writing from my "new iPad" sorry but it is changing some words. Btw, this is my 3rd iPad after the 1, 2 because I liked not because I was forced. 🙂

[station_two]

cromwell99 wrote:

I'm with you MPpulido. You're the only person on here with an ounce of common sense...

Well, yes, the rest of the contributors have tons of commom sense.  Sorry you two guys have to make do with a meagerly ounce. 

[MPpulido]

Don't worry you are right, I bought the last version available of CS 5.5 premium edition last year in December, then in July I bought my new canon t4i  but I HAVE NO SUPPORT ON

MY ADOBE PRODUCTS. And the “ADOBE CAMERA RAW’ don’t support my raw files.  No common sense at all.

My no common sense says Adobe please rename the “ADOBE CAMERA RAW” plug-in to “ADOBE FRAUD RAW”.

My common sense says “how much do you offer by my cs5.5 production premium suite” what is the resale price after a year.

My common sense says don’t buy more adobe products, is was not honest to sale Adobe products with less than a year of suppor.

My common sense says use G I M P, it is free and thought away the F….. products.

I have an Idea why Adobe don’t create a camera "Adobe Camera AC" some good lenses and create is own raw format and in cs6.5 bring support only to that camera and its own raw format. Everybody else should use the free DNG converter or pay the upgrade to the new camera and raw format. Sound great. (it is an idea from my only one common sense once and my little brain too :-)) oh I forgot in order to acomplish the support polize is better to name this version adobe STP 1.0

Yes just an once of common sense I which I have more.

[Mollysnoot]

My common sense would say: do a bit of research before dropping a chunk of money on purchasing an expensive software suite like Premium Edition.

Everyone knew CS6 was coming in the first half of 2012 (it was all over the web; Adobe's policy for upgrading to new versions is public knowledge). Support for updating ACR has always been limited to the latest currently shipping version, regardless of when you happend to purchase the previous version. You may not like it, but you have to accept it, and use DNG Convertor if you don't wish to upgrade (a perfectly viable alternative). Good luck with GIMP.

M

[IndyMcDuff]

I was a little taken aback when I found the T4i's new raw files were not readable by Photoshop 5.5 Extended too.  BUT, after listening to what other users told me, I downloaded the free Adobe converter and guess what?  It is just a small program that takes literally no time at all to convert your files to DNG, which is the same as RAW.  So why are your knickers in a twist?

Since when does it hurt to have backup files?  The converter is free.  It is fast.  If it were not, then perhaps you'd have a reason to be so angry.  It is not as if Adobe left the CS5.5 or any other version high and dry.  And why are you barnstorming Adobe instead of Canon?  Didn't they know when they changed the format that it wouldn't work with the most popular and best editing software there is, and therefore work with Adobe to give you a patch?  Better yet, why not tell you on the box that it wouldn't work with the current version of Adobe?  Well, I'll tell you why.  Canon wants you to use THEIR software.  Did you install it?  Did you see what it wants you to do? Why not get angry at them instead of Adobe?

Amongst my cameras I have a Pentax K-5.  That one lets you record in DNG.  End of problem.  Canon does not.  Don't get me wrong, I do love the lightness of the Canon's and so I use them for some things.  But I didn't like the fact that they were trying to get you to subscribe to cloud computing on a monthly basis to be able to work with their files and in software that cannot possibly go toe-to-toe with Adobe.

I've never used the Nikons with other file formats than RAW (NEF in Nikon language)...but today I will look to see if Nikon records in DNG, but I doubt it.  I'll let you know.

To sum it up, the fault lies not with Adobe, but with the camera makers.  They should be selling you cameras and not software subscriptions.  No?  If anyone is greedy here, it is the camera maker.

Personally, since the converter is free, I think Adobe is doing more for you than the camera maker is.  Before you huff and puff and turn red in the face and chew on your keyboard, just try the danged converter and see what you think.  It is fast, easy and has a very small footprint.  Then you can open your RAW files as DNG (lossless) and work on them without losing any of the information or flexibility of the RAW files.

It is simple.  Instead of coming here to vent, why not simply read up on what seasoned users are suggesting to you?  That is why I came to the forum and I'm glad I did.  I'm keeping CS5.5 on two computers, using the converter, and have upgraded to CS6 Extended on two other computers.

I think if you TRY what the other contributors suggested, you will find your complaints are invalid.

I'm guessing that you haven't even downloaded and tried the converter.

One last suggestion.  When you come to a forum and find your topic...why not read through ALL of the comments on that topic to see which might apply to you, work for you, and say thanks to the persons who took the time to offer up what they have found, saving you grief and upsetment.  These are other users, kind enough to try to spare you hours or days of frustration, because they've already done it and come up with an easy solution.

Does any of this make any sense to you?

BTW, for those good people who I may not have thanked previously, thank you very much for your helpful information.

Indy

[IndyMcDuff]

I did check, and no, Nikon does not record in DNG either.  Not even on the D4.

Never installed PictBridge.  Does anyone know whether or not it lets you convert?  I could install it on one computer or another, but would rather not if anyone knows the answer.

Indy

[JP Hess]

I have to tell you that you are just spinning your wheels and getting nowhere.  Nikon doesn't recognize DNG, doesn't shoot DNG, doesn't create DNG, isn't interested in DNG.  Nikon wants you to purchase and use Capture NX2.  Their software has a loyal following.  I have tried it but wasn't impressed with it.  I guess I have been using Adobe products for so long that it's just too difficult to change.  There are other software options to consider.  But the problem is, regardless of your opinion of those other products, nobody has been able to rival the Adobe Products.  I know, some of you are convinced that something else is far better than Photoshop, ACR, or Lightroom.  And you can prove it.  But the user base and track record says something completely different.

If you purchase a new camera with a bigger sensor, new features, and spend in some instances thousands of dollars for that new camera, doesn't it make sense that you should expect to pay a fraction of that price for new software that can fully support that camera?  It seems to me that what some of you are trying to do is kind of like buying a new high performance sports car, and then to save a little money deciding to run recycled engine oil in it.

[IndyMcDuff]

Thanks Jim, I didn't really want to install the Nikon software.

I've other editing programs that sit dormant on my computer.  Oh, some have some fun features, but when I get serious I use Adobe.  Hands down the best, and I'm not arguing that.

What amazes me is that people who use images, be it graphic artists, photographers, whatever...depend on this software for a living...and do not think upgrading is just an expected business expense?

If a person owns several cameras from several makers...installing and paying for all of those different programs is far more outrageous than just keeping ONE up to snuff.

If people would just read what is posted instead of ranting...they would be a whole lot happier!!!!  No?

[Yammer]

IndyMcDuff wrote:

If a person owns several cameras from several makers...installing and paying for all of those different programs is far more outrageous than just keeping ONE up to snuff.

Well said.

People tend to use cameras from one manufacturer, because they mostly use proprietary lens mounts (do I see a pattern forming here?!), and it's too expensive to duplicate lenses across different systems. But, if we did own cameras from two or more manufacturers and shoot raw, are we supposed to buy raw converters from every manufacturer? Of course not. That's just silly.

Nikon, Canon, Sony, Olympus and Panasonic should follow the example set by Pentax, Leica, Ricoh, and Casio. DNG should be an option, just like JPEG (and sometimes TIFF). Photography is expensive enough, thanks.

[Noel Carboni]

IndyMcDuff wrote:

...just try the danged converter and see what you think...

Hear hear!

-Noel

[Victoria Bampton LR Queen]

Let's keep this on topic please.  There's no need for personal comments.  (And I'm replying to the original post in order not to single anyone out).