• Global community
    • Language:
      • Deutsch
      • English
      • Español
      • Français
      • Português
  • 日本語コミュニティ
    Dedicated community for Japanese speakers
  • 한국 커뮤니티
    Dedicated community for Korean speakers
Locked

An Open Letter To Adobe Systems from Scott Kelby about Creative Suite pricing

Explorer ,
Nov 21, 2011 Nov 21, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Views

17.7K

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Explorer ,
Dec 03, 2011 Dec 03, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

As someone who was eagerly anticipating an upgrade to CS6 (currently on CS3) the moment it was released next year, I have to say this new policy leaves an extremely bad taste in my mouth.  Had this been announced, say... when CS5 was first released, I probably would've been more forgiving.  I wouldn't have minded upgrading from CS3 to CS5 in April 2010, and then CS5 to CS6 sometime in 2012.  I still wouldn't be particularly fond of the policy to exclude past versions, but I'd at least have had the chance to get a couple years use out of CS5 for that upgrade fee.  But the way this is being done, to qualify for an upgrade path to CS6 Master Collection upon its release, I'll need to purchase CS5.5 (assuming I bought it before the 20% deal expires, it'll cost me a little over $1100 USD) as it approaches the end of its life-cycle.  I'll get, what?  A few months use out of that, and then if I want CS6 (which I do), I'll have to upgrade to that for whatever the upgrade cost from 5.5 to 6 might be.  I'm sorry, but that's not something I'm going to be doing.

I hope Adobe comes to its senses and takes Scott Kelby's advice to hold off on this policy until CS7 rolls around.  At least that way, no existing users of pre-CS5 software will be stuck with a horrendous cost-of-entry in order to get into the upgrade cycle without lagging forever behind.  Yes, I could buy 5.5 now and then not upgrade until 6.5 was a few months away from being replaced by CS7 (essentially only having to pay once every 2 years or so)... but being forever sentenced to lag behind like that unless I absorb a ~$2000 double-upgrade within the span of a few months is off-putting enough to make me drop Adobe software for good.

While I do want CS6, I don't want it enough to just lay down and take this.  If Mr. Kelby's advice isn't heeded, I can assure Adobe that Master Collection CS3 will be the final version of any Adobe product I own.  If you truly want to institute this new upgrade policy (though I'd advise against it in general), wait until CS7.  If not, here's one customer you'll lose for sure; and based on the backlash this is receiving thus far in just a few weeks, I believe I would be far from the only one.  There are probably still many customers who haven't even heard, not regularly following the kind of tech or industry blogs it's been reported on (and certainly not following Adobe Press Announcements).  Imagine their outraged shock when they come to your website on the day CS6 is announced or released, only to find their software is no longer eligible for an upgrade.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
LEGEND ,
Dec 03, 2011 Dec 03, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Funny thing...  I was just up at Walt Disney World.

Hundreds of thousands of people packed themselves in like sardines spending hundreds of dollars a day for the privilege to wait in line or of paying even more (e.g. for outrageously priced trinkets or food).  Even with "park hopper" passes and some of the parks staying open really late, we actually only got to go through no more than 3 or 4 main attractions a day.  Mostly we just waited for transportation (boats, buses, etc.) or stood in lines that snaked back and forth outside and through various buildings.

My conclusion:  There is no limit to how much people can be asked to spend for less and less actual value, and they keep paying it.  There may be a fairly large percentage of people out of work, but the amount of disposable income amongst the rest is still HUGE.

Adobe are positioning themselves to take advantage of this.

Does it affect me?  No.  I buy the Photoshop upgrade every version release, right when it's released.  I have to; the product is at the core of my own business, and frankly a couple hundred dollars every year and a half is no big deal.  But I'm not a "casual" Photoshop user.  I fear Adobe has overestimated the morality of hundreds of thousands of "casual" Photoshop users who may seek "less legal" copies for that five hundred dollar difference.  It's already becoming less and less important to the young folks to pay for software online if they can get cracked versions for free.  This will only make things worse.  Much worse.

-Noel

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Participant ,
Dec 03, 2011 Dec 03, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

If Photoshop was the only Adobe application I had to worry about upgrading I wouldn't sweat it over the new licensing model. The reality is I use multiple Adobe applications frequently.

Whether or not a "casual user," small business or large business can afford to upgrade through every Adobe product cycle is one issue. That issue is compounded by the fact not every Adobe product upgrade is really worth buying.

Any long time Adobe customer has gone through the experience of being a little underwhelmed by an upgrade to the very next version. While new Photoshop features like Content Aware Fill are pretty nice (when they work as advertised) it's not quite as much of a game changing feature as the arrival of layers or the history palette back in the 1990s. Photoshop's new HDR and panorama stitching tools are improved. But they're arguably still outperformed by 1 or more third party applications. Not every causal Photoshop user or business using Photoshop has the need to mess with HDR images or stitched panoramas. I'm willing to bet most Photoshop users would probably still be able to do everything they need to do with the program even if they were using a 10 year old copy. Most of the program's basics are still there.

I don't think Adobe is taking this factor into account as it expects every individual or business user to upgrade through every product cycle, no matter how overwhelming or underwhelming the new upgrade may be. There is a very strong chance a great deal of both individual users and business users will just stick with the old versions of Adobe products they're using.

With Adobe demanding full price for an upgrade if a user sits out one version of a product cycle that will give individual and businesses users more incentive to just keep using old versions of Adobe software as long as the software keeps working. I would probably still be using CS3 applications if they worked on my Win7 64-bit machine. Having to pay full price for a new "perpetual license" would be a little easier if one just didn't bother upgrading that license "seat" for several years.

I've heard it from at least a few service bureaus their main reason for upgrading to the latest versions of Illustrator or InDesign is merely being able to open customer submitted files without having to ask those customers to save down to an earlier version. Even with having Illustrator CS5.1 out of habit I usually save finalized artwork down to something like CS3 so more collegues will be able to open the artwork without any problems.

Re: Disney customers willing to pay more for the prestige of getting park hopper passes, I don't think those people represent everyone in the United States. The reality is those "McMansion Owners" represent a small part of the general public. Personally, I think a trip to Disney World is quite overpriced and overrated.

Adobe is trying to make a very bold grab for increased positive cash flow. To paraphrase an old Star Wars metaphor, the more Adobe squeezes its registered users the more of us will slip through their fingers. I think this strategy is going to back-fire. Instead of increasing cash flow, I think the move will reduce Adobe's cash flow quite significantly.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
LEGEND ,
Dec 03, 2011 Dec 03, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Bob the Sign Guy wrote:


That issue is compounded by the fact not every Adobe product upgrade is really worth buying.

Since this is the Photoshop forum (and since I only own Photoshop) I won't speak to the other members of the suite, but honestly I've not felt slighted by the feature enhancements in any of the major Photoshop version releases in the last decade.  I haven't bought Photoshop CS5.1, simply because Photoshop CS5 12.0.4 is functionally identical save for a licensing model option I don't use.

-Noel

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Enthusiast ,
Dec 03, 2011 Dec 03, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Bob the Sign Guy wrote:

Adobe is trying to make a very bold grab for increased positive cash flow. To paraphrase an old Star Wars metaphor, the more Adobe squeezes its registered users the more of us will slip through their fingers. I think this strategy is going to back-fire. Instead of increasing cash flow, I think the move will reduce Adobe's cash flow quite significantly.

Time will tell whether they will make more or less money this way.

Clearly many companies are struggling for revenue during the current down turn, and will be looking to get more revenue from existing customers.  Trouble is, the down turn affects their customers too.  US and Europe are now facing the possible double-dip recession, and although the second dip is predicted to be less deep (in terms of growth rate hit) it may be longer, and have a more profound effect on spending patterns.  From surveys it appears consumers are no longer thinking of a quick hit, and so long as you keep your job you're OK.  Rather, people (it seems) are thinking that long-term they're not going to have as much money to spend.  For years, not just months.  That makes people consider cheaper options on any possible spend (one option being not to spend).  Businesses that were talking about spending a bit more as we come out of recession are battening down the hatches again.  For some businesses as well as for consumers, having the latest version of Photoshop is an option, not a necessity.  How many licenses you have is another choice. 

As I say, time will tell. 

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Participant ,
Dec 03, 2011 Dec 03, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Here's another trend Adobe needs to consider in making things more restrictive with upgrades:

Declining personal customer hardware sales.

Today users don't have to upgrade their computing hardware anywhere nearly as often as they had to in the past.

In the 1990s my workplace was replacing computers as frequently as every 12 to 18 months. Here in 2011 it's pretty easy to get 5 years or more of life from a desktop computer as long as you're not trying to do some very demanding bleeding edge stuff with it. Editing 2D pixel based images isn't bleeding edge, at least not anymore. A lot of entry level PCs have enough RAM, CPU/GPU horsepower and disc capacity to handle editing large Photoshop files fairly easily.

This is one of the primary reasons why HTML5 adoption is hardly going anywhere. Countless millions of computer users are sticking with old PCs running Windows XP. And they're using old web browsers like IE7 and IE8. Those users need a machine running Vista or Win7 in order to upgrade to IE9, and HTML5 support in IE9 is still laughably bad.

Hewlett Packard still isn't clear on whether they'll keep selling personal computers or get out of the business as they threatened to do several months ago. They know most desktop and notebook computer users aren't changing out hardware frequently at all. They see all the frequent purchases and reoccurring upgrades taking place the smart phone and tablet market. But that's an entirely different market from personal computer use. Nevertheless they want that same kind of revenue stream taking place with personal computer sales. And that just isn't going to happen.

Smart phones and tablets are media consumption devices. They're not so good for getting work done, like writing a term paper or composing a magazine article layout. You need a personal computer for that. The trouble is people don't have to change computers nearly as often as they do a smart phone. And there's no gadget fashion tied to it the way Apple has managed to do with the iPhone and iPod.

I think Adobe is trying to apply a smart phone model of revenue stream speculation to the personal computing product category where users no longer need to frequently upgrade.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Explorer ,
Dec 03, 2011 Dec 03, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

While the downturn was partially responsible for my decision not to upgrade to CS5 when it first came out (my normal habit is to upgrade pricey software every second major release), I can say it's not responsible for my irritation now.  Now, it's mostly just the principle of the thing, when Adobe asks me to put down over $1100 (or $1400 if I don't make the purchase immediately within the next 3 weeks) right now just so that I'll be able to be eligibile to upgrade to the version I was planning to a few months down the road.  Even if it's only $550 to upgrade from 5.5 to 6, to me, that feels like exortion.  When I opted to not buy CS5 Master Collection for financial considerations during the downturn, I was trusting in Adobe's 3 version back policy to enable me to wait for CS6 and still get a discount on the upgrade (albeit, less of one than were I upgrading from CS5, but I believed I'd be better able to absorb the cost in another year or two, and that's proven to be correct).  If that trust turns out to have been misplaced, and Adobe chooses to throw loyalty long-time customers out the window with this last-minute announcement in a bid to grab a quick buck, then it  certainly won't be forgotten.  Not by me, nor by many others.

As far as the Disney World comments go, I don't agree.  This is true for some things, perhaps (like Disney World, although I'd argue its visitors aren't necessarily representative of the behaviour of the masses under normal circumstances), but not even close to being true for everything.  Look at what's happened to Netflix when they announced unwelcome changes to certain fundamental aspects of their service, which included drastic price increases.  Customer backlash, plummeting stock values, quick backpedallling, apologies.  And that was all over much less cost to the customer, in terms of dollars spent, than these new changes Adobe is making.

Personally, if it comes to that, I'm simply not going to participate in a coercive upgrade model.  I look forward to Adobe's response to Kelby's open letter, ideally sometime in the next couple weeks before that 20% off deal expires.  The more people who rush to purchase CS5.5 before the end of the year for that paltry 20%, the more potentially upset customers who'll feel that they were extorted if Adobe backpedals on this decision and it turns out their CS3 or CS4 product would've been eligible after all.  The clock is ticking.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Expert ,
Dec 03, 2011 Dec 03, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I look forward to Adobe's response to Kelby's open letter,

Same here but I'm not holding my breath for a public response any time soon.

I wonder if Kelby or the NAPP will take the grassroots backlash any further?

The "3 versions policy" seemed to be accepted as fair and reasonable when introduced.

The act and timing of this new "current version only" policy (coupled with the half baked 20% off CS5.5 for a short time offer) is just creating anti-Adobe sentiment everywhere I look online.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Expert ,
Dec 05, 2011 Dec 05, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

There are some grey spots in the communication that, I feel, Adobe should answer.

1)Historically, there has always been a grace period, that allowed get the newer version for free if you purchased the old one very close, or after the announcement, and before the actual disponibility of the new version of the Creative Suite. This would allow, this time, to upgrade from CS3 onwards to CS5.5, and get CS "next", bypassing, this time, the one version limit.

I am wondering if Adobe did not have to react due to the lenghtening of the release cycle of full versions.

Before, major versions were released 18 months apart.

Three versions back then was 54 months, so 4years and 6 months.

Now, under the new releases model, a three "full versions" gap would equal 60 months, but with 6 point versions apart...

But the change to a single full version is quite harsh, and is computed by many as the trick to make the Creative Cloud cheaper than an upgrade.

But in fact the Creative Cloud is already cheaper if you add the point versions upgrades, subscriptions to Muse, Carousel and maybe Edge, plus the price of whatever tablet apps are released.

Compared to the Master Suite.

If one uses only, say the Video Production, and has no need for the other offerings, going the Creative Cloud way is more expensive.

(BTW, the text on this page is confusing, master collection should be removed from the upgrade plans below the three first ones:

http://www.adobe.com/products/creativesuite/mastercollection/buying-guide-upgrades.html )

2)Another point that is not clear: there does not seem to be an upgrade plan for existing owners of suites to the creative cloud. If the stated goal is to move all customers into a subscription, some incentive should be there for historical customers.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Enthusiast ,
Dec 05, 2011 Dec 05, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I guess we can end this discussion with: "Adobe will no longer listen to users, but will, in future, listen to shareholders screams and whining to increase/create revenue streams".

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Explorer ,
Dec 05, 2011 Dec 05, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

PECourtejoie wrote:

1)Historically, there has always been a grace period, that allowed get the newer version for free if you purchased the old one very close, or after the announcement, and before the actual disponibility of the new version of the Creative Suite. This would allow, this time, to upgrade from CS3 onwards to CS5.5, and get CS "next", bypassing, this time, the one version limit.

That's true, and it's something I was thinking about afterwards.  I remember after CS5 was announced, there was a grace period of several weeks where if you bought or upgraded to the CS4 version of your suite or product, you'd be entitled to a free upgrade to CS5 when it shipped.  If that was the case this time around, then I would take advantage of it and upgrade to CS5.5 during the grace period in order to get CS6.

PECourtejoie wrote:

But in fact the Creative Cloud is already cheaper if you add the point versions upgrades, subscriptions to Muse, Carousel and maybe Edge, plus the price of whatever tablet apps are released.

Compared to the Master Suite.

If one uses only, say the Video Production, and has no need for the other offerings, going the Creative Cloud way is more expensive.

While that's true, there are also many people who find the prospect of cloud software subscriptions unappealing (myself, for one).  I vastly prefer paying for something once and having it from that time on.  The Creative Cloud subscription seems like a good deal for those who don't have that prejudice, or those who might want to use the additional "cloud" services that the boxed/download perpetual license won't have, but that won't be enough to change the minds of many customers.  The Creative Cloud will apparently be around $50 a month, so it works out to $600/year.  Assuming Adobe sticks to a 24 month cycle for major versions, always with a x.5 release around the half-way point (and assuming the upgrade prices for the perpetual license stay about what they are now), then the Creative Suite "box" upgrade will still  be slightly cheaper, dollar-wise.  To upgrade from CS5 to 5.5 is $550, and I'm assuming 5.5 to 6 might be around that same price, and then CS5 to 6 assuming the $950 position on that upgrade guide chart).  When we're going to CS7, then I assume those prices will remain about equivalent for upgrades from CS6 and 6.5.

However Adobe decides to deal with this customer backlash, there are numerous ways they can appease most of us.  Sony Creative Software has the most generous upgrade policies I've encountered for their products (granted, they only really offer competing products for Premiere Pro and Audition); Adobe is looking mighty greedy next to such companies right now. This thread alone has some good suggestions,

1) Allow a grace period with CS6 so that users of CS3 and CS4 aren't left out in the cold, becase many of us will simply go elsewhere if this doesn't happen.  This could either take the form of an "upgrade to CS5.5, receive CS6 free" once CS6 is officially announced, or a period of 1-2 months after CS6 ships during which upgrades from CS3 and CS4 are allowed.

2) If they stick to the "1 version back", a price reduction of a couple hundred off the suite upgrades might help soften the blow.

3) Consider a "2 version back" instead.

Or some combination of features from the above.

Truth be told, if Adobe sticks to a ~24 month release cycle for major versions from here on out, I wouldn't really be opposed to upgrading every major version.  $950-$1000 every 2 years to keep the Master Collection current sounds like a pretty good deal to me.  But if Adobe expects me to buy CS6 as if I'm a new customer when I own both CS and CS3, they're in for a rude awakening.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Participant ,
Dec 05, 2011 Dec 05, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

One aspect of the Creative Cloud I find a little more interesting is the inclusion of Typekit to give users access to possibly thousands of typefaces for use as web fonts on web sites. The Typekit service on its own seems to be pretty reasonably priced. Although one can bundle only so many type families into a web site design before falling into areas of bad taste. Still, just about all the type I own has licensing which expressly forbids bundling into web sites using techniques like @font-face. Considering the various subscriptions Typekit offers I wonder which tier Creative Cloud customers will be placed.

I would be much more excited about the Creative Cloud if type licensing access extended over into various forms of print use.

Adobe has never been very generous in terms of the amount of type it bundles into applications or suites. Over the years the offerings in type have become ever more paltry. I was very underwhelmed by the lack of bundled type I found in Master Collection CS5.5. And the bonus download of Adobe Text could have at least featured more weights -like what was delivered with Adobe Garamond PremierPro in CS2. 34 weights in PremierPro; just 6 in Adobe Text. Competitors like Corel and Deneba have gone considerably farther with their type offerings. The only thing I can say against them is their bundled fonts often have limited character sets, and applications like CorelDRAW still don't have full OpenType feature support to access extended character sets. OTOH, I get the feeling most users don't really care about things like ligatures, fraction numeral sets, alternative characters, etc. Likewise, a pretty significant portion of the bundled type in Adobe Master Collection CS5.5 was in the form of "legacy" TrueType fonts with limited character sets.

Quality type is expensive. However, one of the reasons why good type is so expensive is so very few people are willing to pay extra for it. If the base of paying users is dramatically expanded somehow then the price of foundry quality type could be radically reduced while still giving typeface designers good pay for their work.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
New Here ,
Dec 05, 2011 Dec 05, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Hope Adobe will listen to their users.

cd key www.onlinecdkeyseller.com

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
LEGEND ,
Dec 05, 2011 Dec 05, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Bart may be right; for some reason big companies with big user bases seem to take on more of a "we know best and you don't matter" philosophy.  Some might say it's because individual user voices are drowned out in a roar, but I can't imagine anyone screaming support for this particular policy change.  Shareholders, as Bart has mentioned, want profits and payouts; I doubt they know enough to agree in any big way on the details of HOW that can be accomplished.  Just tell them that whatever changes are being made are being made to increase same, and what could they do?

Y'know, all this might have been better received if Adobe had simultaneously announced a price reduction...  If they'd knocked a few hundred dollars off the full sell price (and maybe some off the upgrade price as well), it seems to me people might have ignored the "one version back" upgrade policy change in their zeal to talk about how great Adobe was for making their software more affordable to more users.  Think about it...  WHY do people skip an upgrade?  If an upgrade was half the price, twice as many would upgrade, I suspect.  Then there would be fewer folks to complain over a 1 version back policy change, no?

-Noel

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Expert ,
Dec 05, 2011 Dec 05, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

If they'd knocked a few hundred dollars off the full sell price (and maybe some off the upgrade price as well), it seems to me people might have ignored the "one version back" upgrade policy change in their zeal to talk about how great Adobe was for making their software more affordable to more users.

There's an element of truth to that.

Off topic a little: When the Creative Suites were first introduced in 2003, the rush to get the deeply discounted software was akin to Black Friday.

I remember howls of protest in these forums when people gradually realized that they could not upgrade single components of the Suites. Only Suite to Suite upgrades were (and are) available.

There was nothing new about that policy. It was always part of the Suite deal (pardon the pun). But the low entry price meant many ignored the fine print.

Interestingly, this time around, rather than being viewed as a good deal, the limited-time 20% off CS5.5 offer is being viewed more cynically, primarily due to its poor timing and its clear link to the one-version-back policy - as Kelby points out - I suspect.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Expert ,
Dec 06, 2011 Dec 06, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I'm trying to decide now if the newer features of the Suite, especially Content Aware Fill in Photoshop and Perspective Grids in Illustrator, combined with the 20% discount, would be enough for me to justify the 5.5 upgrade now. I have 25 days to decide (when the discount ends). There's so many other purchases I've been forgoing, other software, lenses, et al., that it will take a lot of thought and consideration.

And you just wait, the grace peiod will be, "If you bought 5.5 after January 1, 2012".

Damn, Adobe, you used to be cool.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Participant ,
Dec 06, 2011 Dec 06, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Unfortunately more and more large American businesses are more steeped to selling stock to shareholders instead of selling product to customers.

Lots of graphic designers are caught in a squeeze. The broader economy is still pretty bad, making it necessary for many to work even harder chasing after a limited number of projects. A lot of markets have been poisoned by self-taught amateurs who don't know what to charge for certain types of work. Sadly, the average customer doesn't know the difference between good design and bad design. So they'll save a buck and get their stuff from someone likely to set everything in freaking Arial and Comic Sans, with the lettering distorted to boot. Amateur hour has affected most niches of creative work. I recently saw an article (I think at the Forbes web site) listing 10 jobs where the earnings weren't worth the hassle or overhead to pursue. Professional photographer was listed among those jobs. Anyone with a DSLR suddenly thinks he's Eddie Adams. By that logic, if I buy the same model of Les Paul used by Zack Wylde shouldn't I be able to play just as well as him?

Anyway, the simple point of that rant is many designers do not have it easy. If Adobe wants to start hitting users with a sort of Apple style "Mac tax" for the priveledge of using their software products it's just going to make the situation a little bit tougher still.

Re: the perspective grid in Illustrator. I rarely ever used that feature when it was introduced in Macromedia Freehand. It may come in handy for certain kinds of graphic effects. In terms of creating a 3D illustration or 3D technical drawing, I would rather use a real 3D modeling program to get the job done or sketch something by hand, scan it and then dress it up in Illustrator and/or Photoshop. For me the bigger improvement in Illustrator CS5 was the addition of adjustable variable stroke widths, controls over arrow heads and dashed lines and more graphics tablet oriented drawing tools (like the bristle brush) to give vector-based artwork a more natural feel. It lessens to need to draw/paint something by hand and scan/trace the results.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Engaged ,
Dec 06, 2011 Dec 06, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Amateur Hour affected architectural photography way back in the 70's, Not so much the work; architectural photography does require certain skills, but with respect to pricing. Finally, digital did it in. Buy PS and a camera for the firm and send out the junior architect.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
LEGEND ,
Dec 06, 2011 Dec 06, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Lawrence,

Sort of like "desktop publishing" hurt design, and typography, as ANY underling could output a brochure...

Hunt, the retired "architectural photographer"

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Enthusiast ,
Dec 07, 2011 Dec 07, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Yes "ANY underling could output a brochure", but do it well. I've seen enough design work come through Publisher to know that it is not done well. Of course they always ask why it costs so much when you have all those beautiful templates available, don't you use the 'design button' and what's wrong with setting type at 18% of width.

Excuse me, I'm getting physically sick all of a sudden.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
LEGEND ,
Dec 06, 2011 Dec 06, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Semaphoric, aren't you a photographer as well?  For Photographers it seems to me the improved quality of the Camera Raw converter ("2010 Process") alone is worth the upgrade price for Photoshop.  I know you said "suite".  That's tougher to justify.

And yes, Content Aware Fill really does work.  I was just using it...  Check out what it did, with no other retouching, with this light pole (click to see animation)...

LightPoleRemoved.gif

-Noel

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Engaged ,
Dec 06, 2011 Dec 06, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I don't see how content aware could ever get the vertical edge of the wall correct without retouching. I seldom ever get it complete and I use it all the time. I assume you took it out, not put it in.

You need to fix up the palm leaves in the crown where the light standard crossed over.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
LEGEND ,
Dec 06, 2011 Dec 06, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

That amazed me too - I think it must have noticed that there was a similar wall with edge nearby.  I honestly did not retouch this - all I did was Edit - Fill after selecting all around the light pole, a few pixels out.  The only things after were to crop and downsample the image before posting it here.

You have pointed out some minor issues where the palm leaves were copied from nearby by the tool, but I'll bet you'd never notice them if you weren't shown exactly what to look for and where to look for it.

-Noel

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Engaged ,
Dec 06, 2011 Dec 06, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

True, but once you see it....

The only wall that corresponds is the one immediately to the right. Pretty good, imo!

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Enthusiast ,
Dec 06, 2011 Dec 06, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Noel Carboni wrote:

For Photographers it seems to me the improved quality of the Camera Raw converter ("2010 Process") alone is worth the upgrade price for Photoshop.

Agreed, but I get the improved Camera Raw with Lightroom.  That's a much cheaper upgrade, and for me worth upgrading every time.  I upgraded to Photoshop CS5 (from CS3) but can't justify upgrading every time, so I'm probably stuck with CS5 for the indefinite future. 

PS - very impressed by your content aware demo, and have had similarly unbelievable results.  It's a real time-saver, but I think that comes in Elements now, doesn't it? 

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines