Lack of camera raw support for Canon 80D

[wulfie1943]

I am very disappointed in Adobe for not providing camera raw support in Photoshop CS6 for the Canon EOS 80D.  I paid for the software and expected it to work regardless of the camera I purchased.  So now you expect me to convert raw to dng and then edit in Photoshop?    I don't have time for another step to process my images.  I won't be buying or using any more of your products.

[John Waller]

wulfie1943  wrote

I paid for the software and expected it to work regardless of the camera I purchased.

Never going to happen. Camera Raw updates and varying compatibility with different versions of Photoshop have been ongoing since 2002.

Tell the camera manufacturers your grievances. They insist on making cameras with unique, proprietary Raw formats for every camera model forcing Adobe to reverse engineer the Raw format every time and issue Raw updates.

As a goodwill gesture, for those who want to spend $1,000s on new cameras and lenses but don't want to pay $10/month for the Cloud version of Photoshop, Adobe has opted not to charge for the DNG converter.

If the camera makers would include a Save as DNG option in camera, you would not have any problems with Raw file format compatibility with your version of Photoshop.

[Test Screen Name]

You clearly expected wrong. When Adobe say CS6 is out of support they mean it. Why do people expect software makers to subsidise the profits of camera makers?

[davescm]

Years ago I had a set of manual FD Canon lenses that I used with the cameras of the time. When Canon moved to their EOS auto-focus system and I decided to change cameras, they did not offer to change all my lenses to electronic focus for free, and nor did I expect them to. Canon are a company not a charity. I accepted that upgrading meant upgrading the system end to end or having the inconvenience of using an FD to EOS adapter.

Moving back to modern day, if you choose to freeze part of your digital camera system in time (in your case Photoshop CS6 which was introduced in 2012) then you cannot expect Adobe to upgrade another part of your system for free. Adobe are also a company not a charity. They do though provide a free solution that introduces a little bit of inconvenience by using the free DNG convertor.

Dave

[wulfie1943]

I guess I should have expected such responses, obviously staunch Adobe supporters - or employees.  Check out Corel, which is probably the nearest competitor.  They provide an update to their software to support the Canon 80D.  Apparently they appreciate their customers.  I rest my case.

[c.pfaffenbichler]

If you prefer processing RAW images with ACR instead of the camera maker’s proprietary software you might want to petition them to allow shooting DNG so that Adobe does not have to play catch-up with each new camera model’s RAW format.

Edited

Sorry, I realised I had overlooked you mentioning that using the free DNG Converter would be an inacceptible imposition on you, so you already had refused the free alternative Adobe offered.

[Test Screen Name]

Nah, not staff, they know better than to argue, even with someone who doesn't want to spend money but keep running 6 year old software ("loyal customer" as some self describe.

However, I looked into your claim about Corel. AfterShot Pro 2, released 4 years ago, doesn't seem to support this camera. You have to upgrade: pay Corel. Different how? Only that you chose to freeze on CS6 and are upset that Adobe kept releasing new versions (4 since then) and wlumen' freeze along with you. But you can find a thousand up for a camera, not 10 a month for software. Well, your priorities, your choice.

[c.pfaffenbichler]

As the original poster declared they will stop using Adobe software it would be interesting which of the alternatives they decide upon using and if/how that will affect their workflow and efficiency.

[wulfie1943]

At least with Corel you pay for the software and own it.  You aren't obligated to pay a monthly "subscription fee" as with the newer versions of Photoshop.  And I refuse to subscribe to anything, not just Photoshop.  As far as the comment from someone that I can find a thousand bucks for a camera but don't want to keep paying Adobe for new releases of software (or subscription fees), I wasn't aware until AFTER I bought the camera that Photoshop CS6 can't read the RAW images.  Whether I should blame Canon or Adobe is up for argument, but it will be much easier for me to find software (with a subscription) that supports the 80D than to opt for a different camera.

I don't intend to comment further on this.  It appears that others have a different opinion and that's fine.  Oh, and by the way, Affinity Photo (formerly Serif PhotoPlus) also supports the 80D, as does Corel AfterShot 3 (I think it costs about $20 to upgrade from 2 to 3).  And there are no doubt other programs out there that do the same.

In my opinion, Adobe is a bully that has no regard for its customers.  I bought CS4, upgraded to CS5 and later to CS6 - so I have more invested in Photoshop than I do in my 80D!  No more upgrades for me, and no subscriptions.  Those of you who want to keep supporting a company like Adobe, have at it - and good luck.

[wulfie1943]

One last comment, and I do mean LAST.  I bought Microsoft Office 2010 and continue to use it.  It still does everything it did when I bought it.  I don't pay a monthly subscription fee.  And it's seven years old, which I believe is older that Photoshop CS6.

Again, I rest my case.  And I do so with finality.

[Dan Rodney]

wulfie1943  wrote

It still does everything it did when I bought it.

Your Photoshop CS6 still dos everything it did when I bought it... It did not support the 80D then, and it does not now. In your words "I rest my case."

Adding support for new cameras requires work. Why do you expect Adobe to keep supporting old sofware forever for free? Do you work for free on a regular ongoing basis?

[Test Screen Name]

Surely, though, CS6 continues to do everything it did when you bought it. Heck, I still use Office 2003 and Photoshop 7.0 on some computers, and they do still do what they used to do, as well as they ever did. But you are asking for them to do something NEW. Adobe have to buy the camera and work out what on earth the RAW format does in this new camera, which isn't the same as any previous camera... So, money and time spent. Like any professional, they expect to be paid for this investment. We're all used to freeloaders though.

[iamtron]

Lots of people buy the suites, not just one app, so saying "it's only $10 a month" just isn't being truthful, and I would argue it is just dishonest.

The cost for the suites is $79 a month, which in five years (the average an individual keeps one computer)  is $4,740.  Why not just tell everyone it is $4,740?  oh, yeah right, no one would buy it.

The argument that a manufacturer should "freeze" development to the hardware available at time of software production is just ignorance.  To follow that logic no monitor, printer, or any USB device would work.  Or are we only carving out Adobe and cameras in this conversation?

Spending $1k-$3k on a suite, I think most would expect more than 2-3 years of use.

How many of those out there would like to have to buy a new version of windows or mac os every time any piece of hardware s purchased?  You wouldn't - so I guess your freeloaders yourself.  Anyone want to guess which is costs more to develop - a picture editor or a full blown operating system?

Its not like RAW is hardcoded into photoshop - it isn't - it is a separate plug in.  Are you people that dense?

Think of RAW like a printer device driver, it connects hardware to the software.  In this case all is it doing is converting a file.  Obviously they are easily doing it with DNG - do you really think they could not program the same into the RAW plugin?

Does adobe have the solution to allow cs6 to import newer raw formats? yes they do.  Will they release it? no they will not.

Of course everyone knows that you *must* connect to the internet in order to use the subscription service, and that you *must* have a credit card.  So if you want to go on a journey for 3-4 months, taking photos and processing, in order to use what you have paid for your have to connect to the internet.  Brilliant piece of programing that was.

There a few forums where arrogance is more widespread than utter ignorance, on this forum, there is an abundance of both.

[Dan Rodney]

iamtron  wrote

The argument that a manufacturer should "freeze" development to the hardware available at time of software production is just ignorance.  To follow that logic no monitor, printer, or any USB device would work.  Or are we only carving out Adobe and cameras in this conversation?

I think you don't quite understand the RAW file format. Unlike USB, HDMI, etc. (which are standards), RAW is not a single standard format. Different camera manufactures have different formats, and each new camera requires an update to the RAW processing software. You can't simply support some "RAW standard" and have everything work forever with no more work.

[davescm]

iamtron  wrote

Does adobe have the solution to allow cs6 to import newer raw formats? yes they do.  Will they release it? no they will not.

Yes they do release a solution at zero cost -  is the free DNG convertor

Dave

[D Fosse]

I suggest  we all just let this go. The facts have all been presented and clearly none of them have any impact.

There will always be people who want something for nothing.