# Adobe Ending Camera RAW Support for Photoshop CS6



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jul 29, 2015)

```
<p>From Adobe:</p>
<p>In order to pursue further innovations in image processing and workflow technology, the next release of Adobe Camera Raw (v 9.1.1) will be the final version available for use with CS6. Customers can utilize the free Adobe DNG Converter utility to receive the very latest camera support for CS6 and older versions of our software going all the way back to Photoshop CS2 and Lightroom 1.0.</p>
<p>Learn more about the <a href="https://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/digital-negative.html">Adobe DNG Converter utility</a>.</p>
<p>Download the latest version of the Adobe DNG Converter: <a href="http://www.adobe.com/go/dng_converter_mac">Mac</a> | <a href="http://www.adobe.com/go/dng_converter_win">Win</a></p>
<p>For ongoing innovations in image processing and workflow technology for photographers, become a member and join the <a href="http://www.tkqlhce.com/click-3958327-11840108-1403728798000" target="_blank">Creative Cloud Photography plan.</a></p>
```


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 29, 2015)

I use ACR in CS6 to process my RAW files.

1) Is this just a move to get me to use CC or Lightroom?

2) If I want to stay with ACR / CS6 (and continue to buy new Canon gear periodically), what will my workflow look like now?

- A


----------



## Zeidora (Jul 29, 2015)

That was my reason to move to DxO for RAW conversion. I will not upgrade to CC, total rip-off. Happy in 5.5 extended and will use that till the OS will no longer run it. Keeping a keen eye on Acorn as an alternative. Not there yet, but hopefully in 5-10 years it will be doing everything I need without the annoying subscription.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 29, 2015)

Stop being a bunch of whiners.

Adobe are giving you a free fully supported program to enable you to continue using your old software, they are not forcing you to do anything or give them another cent however many thousands you spend on new cameras they are not pushing you to give them anything. All they are saying is they are not going to pay for programmers to add to a program you bought and paid for which still has all the feature set, and more, than when you did pay for it, which seems fair to me...........


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 29, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> Stop being a bunch of whiners.
> 
> Adobe are giving you a free fully supported program to enable you to continue using your old software, they are not forcing you to do anything or give them another cent however many thousands you spend on new cameras they are not pushing you to give them anything. All they are saying is they are not going to pay for programmers to add to a program you bought and paid for which still has all the feature set, and more, than when you did pay for it, which seems fair to me...........



I asked questions. I am not whining. I do not understand what this announcement means and I'm asking for a clarification.

What is my new workflow? Is it RAW --> DNG Converter --> ACR? RAW --> DNG --> CS6?

Do I lose any of my prior RAW --> ACR functionality or image quality?

- A


----------



## Khalai (Jul 29, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> Stop being a bunch of whiners.
> 
> Adobe are giving you a free fully supported program to enable you to continue using your old software, they are not forcing you to do anything or give them another cent however many thousands you spend on new cameras they are not pushing you to give them anything. All they are saying is they are not going to pay for programmers to add to a program you bought and paid for which still has all the feature set, and more, than when you did pay for it, which seems fair to me...........



Well, if they would develop a different ACR module, that would be true. However they only dropped support. They will still develop ACR for PS CC and LR. Many people will (justly) see this as an another attempt of Adobe to move all their users to subscription model (which is not that cheap in EU, almost double the US price, I do not consider that fair). I'm from the unlucky few (thousands I guess), who bought PS CS 6 for full price just about two weeks before Adobe announced their CC plan, which left me very upset and almost 750 USD lighter (EU prices again). For that price I could (and probably would) switch to CC Photography plan and have it for over 6 years period. In other words - Adobe won't see an eurocent from me until my PS CS 6 ceases being supported at all -and after that, free of any subscription leash I might as well look elsewhere 



ahsanford said:


> I asked questions. I am not whining. I do not understand what this announcement means and I'm asking for a clarification.
> 
> What is my new workflow? Is it RAW --> DNG Converter --> ACR? RAW --> DNG --> CS6?
> 
> ...



You won't lose any functionality as long as you don't buy a brand new camera body with unsupported raw files. After that - DNG converter would be one of your options if you wanted to still use CS 6 to edit such files.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 29, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > Stop being a bunch of whiners.
> ...



Your workflow will remain exactly as it is. Nothing will change until you work files from cameras released after the ACR 9.1.1, at that point you will have to convert those proprietary RAW files to open source DNG files.

Very little will change even at that point, you can still make camera profiles, the files are lossless and you can even include the original .cr2 inside the DNG so if you ever upgrade your software in the future you can still access the untouched RAW data from the camera.

You lose absolutely no functionality by doing this and zero IQ, the only slight issue some people have is opening DNG's in other RAW convertors and the fact that if those convertors use their own proprietary profiles to display images from specific camera models that functionality is lost and the DNG is displayed as 'Adobe Standard', but custom calibrations, which take a few seconds, fix that to a large degree.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 29, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> Your workflow will remain exactly as it is. Nothing will change until you work files from cameras released after the ACR 9.1.1, at that point you will have to convert those proprietary RAW files to open source DNG files.
> 
> Very little will change even at that point, you can still make camera profiles, the files are lossless and you can even include the original .cr2 inside the DNG so if you ever upgrade your software in the future you can still access the untouched RAW data from the camera.
> 
> You lose absolutely no functionality by doing this and zero IQ, the only slight issue some people have is opening DNG's in other RAW convertors and the fact that if those convertors use their own proprietary profiles to display images from specific camera models that functionality is lost and the DNG is displayed as 'Adobe Standard', but custom calibrations, which take a few seconds, fix that to a large degree.



Excellent. Much obliged. So if I stick with my 5D3, my only pain point will be using new lenses that lack ready-made profiles? I realize I can make my own.

I can live with that.

- A


----------



## keithfullermusic (Jul 29, 2015)

i give this thread 5 more comments until it turns into a debate on the subscription model.

i give it 15 comments before it turns into a debate about dynamic range

i give it 34 comments until it turns into a discussion about how canon needs to add 4K video to the new 5D or they will go out of business


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 29, 2015)

Khalai said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > Stop being a bunch of whiners.
> ...



They have developed a different RAW model, and they give it to you for free, name me one other company that does that, how is that pushing you to buy anything?

Anybody that thinks it is _'just'_ to consider this corporate pushing is in denial, they are holding your hand and saying don't worry even when you spent thousands on another camera you won't have to spend a penny with us as we will support your old program with this fully supported convertor - for free! That sounds like pushy to me, NOT...........


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jul 29, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> I use ACR in CS6 to process my RAW files.
> 
> 1) Is this just a move to get me to use CC or Lightroom?
> 
> ...



What this means is that after the next update to ACR, there will be no more. So for future new cameras, you will have two options at least.

1. DPP. open the image in DPP and click edit in photoshop (A batch of images can also be sent)

2. Use DNG

3. Purchase Adobe CC. (I bought mine on sale for $100 for a one year term).


----------



## Skirball (Jul 29, 2015)

Khalai said:


> Well, if they would develop a different ACR module, that would be true. However they only dropped support.



This.





Khalai said:


> I'm from the unlucky few (thousands I guess), who bought PS CS 6 for full price just about two weeks before Adobe announced their CC plan, which left me very upset and almost 750 USD lighter (EU prices again). For that price I could (and probably would) switch to CC Photography plan and have it for over 6 years period. In other words - Adobe won't see an eurocent from me until my PS CS 6 ceases being supported at all



...and this, for me as well. I don't claim the subscription model is a ripoff, it isn't, but I don't care for the leash, and I certainly don't like that they are already pulling back support on CS6, as they said they would not.


----------



## Skirball (Jul 29, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> Your workflow will remain exactly as it is. Nothing will change until you work files from cameras released after the ACR 9.1.1, at that point you will have to convert those proprietary RAW files to open source DNG files.
> 
> Very little will change even at that point, you can still make camera profiles, the files are lossless and you can even include the original .cr2 inside the DNG so if you ever upgrade your software in the future you can still access the untouched RAW data from the camera.



Have you done this for any length of time? I did it for several years before buying CS6. It was the best part of the upgrade for me. No, it's not the end of the world, but it's an extra step, extra pause, any time you upload photos. But the upsetting part is that it's unnecessary. I don't believe for a second that it takes any substantial amount of resources to maintain forward compatibility with future ACR modules. At least, not until they implement a substantial change to the ACR framework. It could be that's what the plan is, but I simply don't get Adobe that much credit.


----------



## Dekaner (Jul 29, 2015)

Really what I want to know is can I continue to call CS6 from LR6 (which I assume will continue to be updated with the latest RAW support). If not, do I have to export to DNG and then open it in CS6? I'd hate to see this functionality broken.


----------



## cayenne (Jul 29, 2015)

Zeidora said:


> That was my reason to move to DxO for RAW conversion. I will not upgrade to CC, total rip-off. Happy in 5.5 extended and will use that till the OS will no longer run it. Keeping a keen eye on Acorn as an alternative. Not there yet, but hopefully in 5-10 years it will be doing everything I need without the annoying subscription.



Yep, pretty much the same for me.

I bought the Adobe Production Premium CS6 suite just before ether went to the CC *rental* paradigm.

So far, while Adobe had brought out some nice new things...I've seen nothing yet so earth shattering that I have to have it, or feel I'm missing something.

I'll continue with my CS6 version of their many tools....but just for fun, I bought the new Affinity Photo and Affinity Designer (AI type tool), each on sale for $39. So far, I'm not finding terribly much that I can't do in Affinity Photo that I can do in PS of CS6 or even CC (I have tried it as demo and on others' computers).

I do wish Adobe would offer both stand alone licensing as well as those that want CC...but I'm not going to *rent* my software just yet. Seems they would gather more people to the Adobe tent if they offered both types licensing.

But anyway, looks like Adobe is starting to get some fairly serious competition finally....from companies that don't force you to pay monthly infinitum for the privilege of using their software. Things like the aforementioned Affinity (Mac only for now, but Windows editions possibly coming out in 2016)...and Blackmagic Design's Davinci Resolve which with version 12 looks to be a fairly decent full blown NLE...to compete with Premier. And then there is BM's Fusion which appears to be able to compete with After Effects.

Nice to have competition.



cayenne


----------



## sanj (Jul 29, 2015)

I use Adobe RAW to process all my photos. Does this mean that Adobe RAW software will not see any further refinements? 

If that is the case then which software should I learn which will be same as Adobe RAW now but will keep getting better with time? Pls advice, I have not worked with any software besides Photoshop. 

Important: I work with smart objects and love the non destructive work flow.

HELP!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 29, 2015)

sanj said:


> I use Adobe RAW to process all my photos. Does this mean that Adobe RAW software will not see any further refinements?



There will continue to be refinements, but only for CC subscribers.


----------



## sanj (Jul 29, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> sanj said:
> 
> 
> > I use Adobe RAW to process all my photos. Does this mean that Adobe RAW software will not see any further refinements?
> ...



Thank you Neuro. THANK YOU. 
Phew.


----------



## AlanF (Jul 29, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> Stop being a bunch of whiners.
> 
> Adobe are giving you a free fully supported program to enable you to continue using your old software, they are not forcing you to do anything or give them another cent however many thousands you spend on new cameras they are not pushing you to give them anything. All they are saying is they are not going to pay for programmers to add to a program you bought and paid for which still has all the feature set, and more, than when you did pay for it, which seems fair to me...........



Compare money grubbing Adobe with Reikan Focal. They have today issued a free Mac upgrade to an incredible new version 2. Just downloaded and found it has loaded all of my results for the last year or so for comparison and reference - did you know they were stored? Stop calling members whiners - they have a justified complaint.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jul 29, 2015)

Dekaner said:


> Really what I want to know is can I continue to call CS6 from LR6 (which I assume will continue to be updated with the latest RAW support). If not, do I have to export to DNG and then open it in CS6? I'd hate to see this functionality broken.



No. Unfortunately I expect that will not happen once a update is issued to lightroom but not a matching one to ACR. This has happened in the past where A new version of Photoshop had to be purchased to enable edit in photoshop. Lightroom basically uses ACR with a different user interface, and the versions must match.

I'm afraid that only the CC version will continue to work that way.

There is provision in LR to add a external editor, and that could be CS6. It would then send a tiff version to the external editor, but it would not automatically come back into Lightroom, you would need to import it.

Perhaps someone will automate that process?

BTW, I used a edit in DPP to test this, and found DPP has issues in Windows 10.


----------



## kaihp (Jul 29, 2015)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> What this means is that after the next update to ACR, there will be no more. So for future new cameras, you will have two options at least.
> 
> 1. DPP. open the image in DPP and click edit in photoshop (A batch of images can also be sent)
> 
> ...



4. Purchase CaptureOne and process the RAW there. It can do some editing too, but I don't know how well it stacks up against, say, LR6 or PS CS6.


----------



## Skirball (Jul 29, 2015)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Dekaner said:
> 
> 
> > Really what I want to know is can I continue to call CS6 from LR6 (which I assume will continue to be updated with the latest RAW support). If not, do I have to export to DNG and then open it in CS6? I'd hate to see this functionality broken.
> ...



When did that happen (LR lost compatibility with PS)? That's a shame; being a LR user I assumed that would always be an option. I don't fully understand why it would lose that connectivity, doesn't LR just export a TIFF anyway? Where does ACR come into it?


----------



## ksgal (Jul 29, 2015)

kaihp said:


> 4. Purchase CaptureOne and process the RAW there. It can do some editing too, but I don't know how well it stacks up against, say, LR6 or PS CS6.



I've been thinking about this anyways, guess it will be a good move to get on with it. I refuse to be tied to the cloud or a subscription, can't stand 2 year phone contracts either. 

Oh... and 'dynamic range' .... just so I got that in there.


----------



## RGF (Jul 29, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > Stop being a bunch of whiners.
> ...



I think raw -> DNG -> current ACR (no new features) will continue to work


----------



## AvTvM (Jul 29, 2015)

Don't use Adobe Photoshop / CS6. But I do use Adobe Lightroom - currently LR 5.7 - as a perpetual license, not CC subscription model. I am considering purchasing LR 6 perpetual license as final Adobe product for use until more alternatives come onstream. 

But ... does this mean Adobe will now also stop RAW support for the LR 6 RAW module (which is the same as ACR)? 

If so, I will not buy LR 6 and stick with LR 5.7 until I buy my next camera and then switch to DPP (if is a Canon camera) or to Capture One Pro. 

For a whole number of reasons, I am not going to rent LR CC (or other subscription software).


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jul 29, 2015)

kaihp said:


> Mt Spokane Photography said:
> 
> 
> > What this means is that after the next update to ACR, there will be no more. So for future new cameras, you will have two options at least.
> ...


Capture one is not even close to Photoshop, Its not a valid substitute. It does some of the things that Lightroom does, but only partially. Its also quite expensive.


----------



## allanP (Jul 29, 2015)

It was a good time with ACR / PS6, but with a new camera that will change.
CC? DNG? No. That's not my way.
It's time to leave.


----------



## hez gone (Jul 29, 2015)

Skirball said:


> Have you done this for any length of time? I did it for several years before buying CS6. It was the best part of the upgrade for me. No, it's not the end of the world, but it's an extra step, extra pause, any time you upload photos. But the upsetting part is that it's unnecessary. I don't believe for a second that it takes any substantial amount of resources to maintain forward compatibility with future ACR modules. At least, not until they implement a substantial change to the ACR framework. It could be that's what the plan is, but I simply don't get Adobe that much credit.



exactly.

and no, i'm not whining. I moved on to Capture One and after getting used to it, actually prefer the interface and results.

converting to DNG increases file size by 25-30 percent if i remember correctly, and while it is not painfully slow, it isn't' quick either. Go to a day long event an come home to process a thousand images and it becomes a real pain in the ass from both a time and sometimes storage point of view.

dropping support is sometimes necessary and sometimes just a way to force users to upgrade, i think this falls into the latter category.


*edit: Capture One offers a very liberal trial version. Full functionality and 30 or 60 days (i forget now), you can even contact them to extend the trial.*


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 29, 2015)

AvTvM said:


> But ... does this mean Adobe will now also stop RAW support for the LR 6 RAW module (which is the same as ACR)?



Supposedly just CS6, support for LR6 will continue. For now.


----------



## NancyP (Jul 29, 2015)

Am I the only one that thinks that someone will hack PS6 and LR6 perpetual-license software to enable a relatively convenient plug-in to put the new.CR2 files through the appropriate new codec and deliver to PS6 or LR6 perpetual. 

Ingest with LR, get files with "does not compute" stamped on them, send the batch of newly ingested files to plug-in, get out a jpeg for the catalog and get the file shipped to whatever action it needs. I really don't know how the software works but it can't be that hard. 

dcraw interprets almost everything and is the basis for a lot of software. 

I want to fool around with a few other RAW converters anyway - I have been hearing good things about Iridient RAW developer (USD 99.00) (plus it handles my Sigma Merrill .x3f files), and some people really like the RAW developer that comes in CaptureOne. The main strong point of C1 is the best tethering, studio shooters love it, it is a little pricy.


----------



## unfocused (Jul 30, 2015)

keithfullermusic said:


> i give this thread 5 more comments until it turns into a debate on the subscription model.
> 
> i give it 15 comments before it turns into a debate about dynamic range
> 
> i give it 34 comments until it turns into a discussion about how canon needs to add 4K video to the new 5D or they will go out of business



Canon is going to go out of business because without 4K Video in the next 5D I will refuse to rent any software that can not give me 24 stops of dynamic range. They are just like Hitler and the Nazis. (I figured it was about time Godwin's law appeared as well)


----------



## kelpdiver (Jul 30, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> Adobe are giving you a free fully supported program to enable you to continue using your old software, they are not forcing you to do anything or give them another cent however many thousands you spend on new cameras they are not pushing you to give them anything. All they are saying is they are not going to pay for programmers to add to a program you bought and paid for which still has all the feature set, and more, than when you did pay for it, which seems fair to me...........



More accurately: "We thank you for your long ago purchase, but we really want you to purchase a newer version (well, now it's subscribe), even if you don't care about any new editing features. If you don't, you're not going to be able to use images from new cameras without jumping through hoops."

There's no technical reason that CS6 cannot get use the added RAW support. It's the stick to force upgrades, and it's hardly the first time we've seen this dance. Will be very interested to see if LR6/CC stops functioning with CS6 as a poster suggested. 

How effective it is depends on how people feel about the alternatives. I was already ready to demo Capture One. 

As for the $10 offer (at least for those of us in the US) - I'd probably be fine with it if is seemed like Adobe has actually lived up to their promise of new features. The premise was that there would be frequent feature releases, but the reality still seems to be major release each year, and not a lot of meat in it. GPU acceleration that really isn't - no thanks. So I'd rather spend that money on third party tools (I've gotten quite a few from Topaz).


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 30, 2015)

kelpdiver said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > Adobe are giving you a free fully supported program to enable you to continue using your old software, they are not forcing you to do anything or give them another cent however many thousands you spend on new cameras they are not pushing you to give them anything. All they are saying is they are not going to pay for programmers to add to a program you bought and paid for which still has all the feature set, and more, than when you did pay for it, which seems fair to me...........
> ...



So you shoot with a digital camera, you have to own a computer, you decide to buy software to maximise your output because the laughable software that comes free with the camera is relatively limited. 

All this continues until you decide to spend thousands on a newer camera, the software works with all the cameras that were released before you bought it and many that were released after you bought it. Pray tell, why is the software company considered such a gouger for limiting their commitment to old versions of their software to a free fully supported program that enables you to spend thousands on new cameras and zero on new software?

As I always say, and nobody ever gives an example, name me one other software company that gives a free fully supported program that enables you to never upgrade your software even when you spend thousands on new hardware.


----------



## Skirball (Jul 30, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> Pray tell, why is the software company considered such a gouger for limiting their commitment to old versions of their software to a free fully supported program that enables you to spend thousands on new cameras and zero on new software?



Because, they continue to develop the module, but simply choose to make it not compatible with the "old version". The old version which you can still buy from Adobe, the one they said they will continue to support. Not saying I don't see the business merit (oxymoron?) in it, but yes, it is gouging. People should be encouraged to upgrade for features not planned obsolescence.


----------



## YuengLinger (Jul 30, 2015)

Adobe reps on their forum are saying Windows 10 support for CS6 will NOT be offered.

Put that in your pipe and smoke it.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 30, 2015)

Skirball said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > Pray tell, why is the software company considered such a gouger for limiting their commitment to old versions of their software to a free fully supported program that enables you to spend thousands on new cameras and zero on new software?
> ...



How is offering a free fully supported solution planned obsolescence? 

You can only accuse somebody of gouging if they are forcing you in to doing something you don't want to do, I still don't see how that can be said of a company that offers a fully supported no cost solution to not pay them money.


----------



## eml58 (Jul 30, 2015)

unfocused said:


> keithfullermusic said:
> 
> 
> > i give this thread 5 more comments until it turns into a debate on the subscription model.
> ...



Focus Lad, Focus


----------



## davidmurray (Jul 30, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > Stop being a bunch of whiners.
> ...



You could simply use the software that Canon supplies with the camera, then use an image editor such as The Gimp or Phoroshop.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jul 30, 2015)

NancyP said:


> Am I the only one that thinks that someone will hack PS6 and LR6 perpetual-license software to enable a relatively convenient plug-in to put the new.CR2 files through the appropriate new codec and deliver to PS6 or LR6 perpetual.
> 
> Ingest with LR, get files with "does not compute" stamped on them, send the batch of newly ingested files to plug-in, get out a jpeg for the catalog and get the file shipped to whatever action it needs. I really don't know how the software works but it can't be that hard.
> 
> ...



It is probably very doable, the way the edit in photoshop works is that lightroom sends a tiff file to photoshop for editing., and after editing, its imported directly back into Lightroom. Since tiff files currently run on almost every version of photoshop there is no compatibility issue, and since LR6 is still being updated, all that is needed is to set lightroom to edit in photoshop as a external editor. The tiff files is sent to photoshop, and the action would merely import the edited tiff file back into lightroom. I'd think it would be easy to do, no hacking required.


----------



## drjlo (Jul 30, 2015)

YuengLinger said:


> Adobe reps on their forum are saying Windows 10 support for CS6 will NOT be offered.
> 
> Put that in your pipe and smoke it.



Such sorry state of affairs. I guess I am not "upgrading" to Win 10 :'(


----------



## Phoneutria (Jul 30, 2015)

YuengLinger said:


> Adobe reps on their forum are saying Windows 10 support for CS6 will NOT be offered.
> 
> Put that in your pipe and smoke it.



No panic.

As Windows 10 user I can ensure that CS6 works fine.


----------



## steen-ag (Jul 30, 2015)

For me Windows 10 is fine for all Apps. CS6, Bridge, LR5 and LR6


----------



## kelpdiver (Jul 30, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> . Pray tell, why is the software company considered such a gouger for limiting their commitment to old versions of their software to a free fully supported program that enables you to spend thousands on new cameras and zero on new software?



Because the product they're forcing users to buy is a full upgrade (now subscription) of the photo editing software, not the RAW image handler. Support for new camera model X represents what, 2% of the functionality of Photoshop? Hell, they show their hand - they give away a free converter that is just inconvenient to use, so clearly they don't view it as important for another other reason but as a carrot to dangle out.

Now if they want to try to argue that it's a big cost to keep supporting ACR updates on CS6, it would be interesting to see it done with a straight face. The stark reality is they're doing it because they can. And that's why customers berate them for it. 



> As I always say, and nobody ever gives an example, name me one other software company that gives a free fully supported program that enables you to never upgrade your software even when you spend thousands on new hardware.



There are numerous examples, particularly in the photo editing arena. Reikan was already mentioned. I bought it 3 years ago - still get updates that offer new functionality, never mind new model support. Topaz gives me upgrades for ever. Ed Hamrick's VueScan product - I bought this in 2000 and still get new versions that support newer OSs, newer models of scanners. These people are all looking for more users, not how to get more money out of the same users for what they already bought. Their 'altruism' is driven by necessity; small players have to stand out, but I can still appreciate them for it. 

With the exception of windows OEM licenses, and a few similar, no one charges me when I spend thousands of dollars on a new PC and transfer my applications to it. When you phrase it this way, it sounds like a VAT tax should apply to any upgrades I would ever do, but instead of the government, it's anyone who sold me product before.


----------



## YuengLinger (Jul 30, 2015)

steen-ag said:


> For me Windows 10 is fine for all Apps. CS6, Bridge, LR5 and LR6



Good to know! Thanks.


----------



## RLPhoto (Jul 30, 2015)

It was going to happen sooner or later. I've never used PS for Raw conversion and used it mostly for exported PSDs from LR. So long as LR is perpetual, I'll be buying them. The day that is gone, .dng converter and lastly when that's gone, on to another system.


----------



## Ladislav (Jul 30, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> kelpdiver said:
> 
> 
> > privatebydesign said:
> ...



+1 for looking at the problem like Adobe's CFO
-1 for looking at the problem like a customer

As a SW developer I see a reason why they are doing that - QA and customer support. Every supported version needs to be separately tested and all issues reported by paying customers somehow resolved. If the testing procedure is not automated and requires a lot manual effort, it can be incredibly slow and expensive. 

It is natural that support of older versions of big applications gets dropped. The question is not "if" but "when". On the other hand I don't think that a product expensive as CS6 should go out of support after 3 years. I would consider 4-5 years window as fair.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 30, 2015)

kelpdiver said:


> Because the product they're forcing users to buy is a full upgrade



No, you are not forced to buy anything, not a spend a single cent, ever. You can still be running LR 1.0 or CS2 with a 5DSR if you want to.

Your other examples are not the same thing at all, they are free upgrades offered for whatever reason by small companies. This is a large software corporation that is offering a fully supported companion program that has a primary use of enabling people to not upgrade the software. 

Adobe are enabling you to use your current software with any new hardware at no cost, *that is not gouging.*


----------



## tron (Jul 30, 2015)

They could offer a new PS CS7 product = (a latest CC version frozen to a specific time) that it would have to be purchased (or upgraded to) just like the CS6.

That CS7 could be non-subscription based. That way users would be happy and Adobe would get paid.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 30, 2015)

tron said:


> They could offer a new PS CS7 product = (a latest CC version frozen to a specific time) that it would have to be purchased (or upgraded to) just like the CS6.
> 
> That CS7 could be non-subscription based. That way users would be happy and Adobe would get paid.



But that isn't what they want to do, that takes them back to their old business model that was failing, they needed a different model and have made a very expensive commitment to instigating one. 

Don't forget Adobe are primarily a professional user software company, amateur photographers might be a vocal user group but they are not that big and important to Adobe, and never have been, from an income perspective. For a company, even a one man band, $50 a month for the software suit or $9.99 for the photographers tools is a very small business commitment, smaller than a phone plan, office space, insurance, electricity, etc etc.


----------



## cayenne (Jul 30, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > But ... does this mean Adobe will now also stop RAW support for the LR 6 RAW module (which is the same as ACR)?
> ...



Yeah, but if you have LR6 (perpetual license) and CS6....does this mean at some point, they stop working together, like you can't sent images for LR to PS anymore...since they usually share the same ACR?

C


----------



## Skirball (Jul 30, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> You can only accuse somebody of gouging if they are forcing you in to doing something you don't want to do, I still don't see how that can be said of a company that offers a fully supported no cost solution to not pay them money.



I only used the word gouging since that's what the discussion was using. I don't know where you get your definition from, that certainly isn't any standard definition; price gouging really isn't the correct term here anyway. But I'll play ball... yes, they're forcing people to move over to a subscription model by removing the support that they said would sustain. But the point you seem to continually miss, the point that upsets most of us, is that it seems maintaining that forward compatibility is a simple matter, and they're choosing to sever the connection, not because it's a resource issue. That could be untrue; I don't know, I don't work at Adobe. But I doubt it, and they've lost public trust over their recent promotional schemes, so most people don't give them the benefit of doubt. Hence, it seems to most of us, that this is an intentional ploy to get more people to move over to the cloud.


----------



## cayenne (Jul 30, 2015)

tron said:


> They could offer a new PS CS7 product = (a latest CC version frozen to a specific time) that it would have to be purchased (or upgraded to) just like the CS6.
> 
> That CS7 could be non-subscription based. That way users would be happy and Adobe would get paid.



I for one, would HAPPILY buy into this one if they'd do it.

I don't understand why they don't offer the choice to folks....and cater to both markets which are surely out there.

There are a LOT of people out there that do not want to RENT their software. I'm thinking this has surprised Adobe a bit (hence them extending the special prices so many times). Why not offer this method too, and satisfy 99% of their customers?

C


----------



## YuengLinger (Jul 30, 2015)

cayenne said:


> tron said:
> 
> 
> > They could offer a new PS CS7 product = (a latest CC version frozen to a specific time) that it would have to be purchased (or upgraded to) just like the CS6.
> ...



Because the intention is to lock customers into a scheme which makes all edits useless unless they continue to pay, pay, pay forever.

These subscription models also mean that once a critical mass is fully dependent on "checking in" and paying forever, the developers can take off for a year, offer no improvements...Or maybe several years. Just keep up with the new camera models.

You'll see. There is no good in the end game for the consumer.

Apologists are either ignorant or have a stake in the game. Ignore their brow beating.


----------



## ifp (Jul 30, 2015)

Skirball said:


> But the point you seem to continually miss, the point that upsets most of us, is that it seems maintaining that forward compatibility is a simple matter, and they're choosing to sever the connection, not because it's a resource issue. That could be untrue; I don't know, I don't work at Adobe. But I doubt it, and they've lost public trust over their recent promotional schemes, so most people don't give them the benefit of doubt. Hence, it seems to most of us, that this is an intentional ploy to get more people to move over to the cloud.



You (and everyone else that thinks this) are making a horribly incorrect assumption here. It costs a LOT of money to continue to support a software package like this. Even if it costs no development time (highly unlikely), you're still looking at doubling the testing and quality assurance time for a release of ACR since it'd have to be tested against CS6 and CC. Not to mention all of the phone/email support. I have no idea what their testing looks like, but I'd have to guess they'd be looking at hundreds of thousands of dollars.

It really just makes no sense for Adobe as a business. Why support customers that aren't coming back? Adobe has moved on. It's been over 2 years since CC was introduced, which I think means the vast majority that are going to adopt CC from CS6 (or earlier) already have. Adobe is losing virtually no business by making this move.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 30, 2015)

YuengLinger said:


> cayenne said:
> 
> 
> > tron said:
> ...



Talk about ignorant. All your edits render just fine after you stop paying the subscription. In LR CC for instance, after cancelling a subscription your Library opens and everything is where is always was, you can move stuff, export stuff, and generally do everything you could when you paid except work in the Develop module.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Jul 30, 2015)

"In order to pursue further innovations in image processing and workflow technology,"

More like in order to try to get more people to go for their crappy rental model for software since they've obviously noticed that many have not yet budged.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Jul 30, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> I use ACR in CS6 to process my RAW files.
> 
> 1) Is this just a move to get me to use CC or Lightroom?



absolutely



> 2) If I want to stay with ACR / CS6 (and continue to buy new Canon gear periodically), what will my workflow look like now?
> 
> - A



Have to go through a RAW to DNG conversion each time you want to edit a RAW file from now on (unless you are OK with roughly doubling your HD storage requirements). Kind of a pain, but the CC rental model is worse.


----------



## Stu_bert (Jul 30, 2015)

ifp said:


> Skirball said:
> 
> 
> > But the point you seem to continually miss, the point that upsets most of us, is that it seems maintaining that forward compatibility is a simple matter, and they're choosing to sever the connection, not because it's a resource issue. That could be untrue; I don't know, I don't work at Adobe. But I doubt it, and they've lost public trust over their recent promotional schemes, so most people don't give them the benefit of doubt. Hence, it seems to most of us, that this is an intentional ploy to get more people to move over to the cloud.
> ...



Apparently, and I did not see the original announcement, but Adobe said they would continue to support new cameras and lenses. Rather than say it's costing them too much so they cant do it, they've done a u turn, *and* apparently changed the website. Change ACR to freeware, and allow individuals to test and raise issues - just as we did with previous Beta releases would significantly alleviate any costs. Change the model and I am sure most users would accept the compromise. And many users help out via forums...

New camera models is more difficult, especially when the sensor design changes (Fuji), so agreed there is code change. Lenses is trivial. It's just a bunch of numbers.

Alternatively ask anyone if they would pay maybe 10-20 bucks a year for new bodies / new lens support and they would probably accept the compromise.

Or, opensource the code and allow others to maintain it. No overhead on Adobe, especially if they are going to develop a new ACR for LR/PS which is their original justification. 

BTW, if they wanted to avoid the uproar, perhaps they should have developed this new version first, and then made the announcement. Then people would not dispute their reasons.

But as has been stated, Adobe is not interested in private individuals. Hence they have no desire to solve these problems or offer a compromise. Ironic as I suspect the enthusiasts do more testing of beta sw than professionals.

Re PS6 / CC. I might be wrong, but I thought you had the option to send to Photoshop even if the versions were different. ACR will attempt to open it but it will not understand any new features. IIRC it wont strip the xml out of the xmp file, it just will ignore it. Same will happen for ACR stand alone. If it is a new lens, then you wont be able to correct it until someone else releases the profile. If you have a new body, then you are indeed stuck. If you have them supported under LR then indeed as was mentioned, you can send them as a TIFF without too many issues. But if you dont have a new lens or body, then I think you can continue to send from an uprev LR to a downrev PS.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Jul 30, 2015)

ifp said:


> Skirball said:
> 
> 
> > But the point you seem to continually miss, the point that upsets most of us, is that it seems maintaining that forward compatibility is a simple matter, and they're choosing to sever the connection, not because it's a resource issue. That could be untrue; I don't know, I don't work at Adobe. But I doubt it, and they've lost public trust over their recent promotional schemes, so most people don't give them the benefit of doubt. Hence, it seems to most of us, that this is an intentional ploy to get more people to move over to the cloud.
> ...



Not really since they all they have been doing is plugging in the new camera interpretations to just get the camera file decoded and nothing more, that's basically just a stock internal plug-in inside of ACR and it really shouldn't require much, if any extra testing at all. They are not translating each new ACR into the old CS6 ACR user interface at all, all they have been doing is simply updating the camera interperpretations module which should be totally standard across all the versions.
And how is phone support any different? And who says they have to offer free phone support for CS6 anyway? Do they even do that now?

The costs are surely extremely minimal. That said they don't have to keep doing it. Although I believe they had said they would to allow people to get at least basic camera support perpetually for their last perpetual release.

Although it didn't affect me, they also rather lied to customers at the end of the perpetual model run when they kept luring people in from CS5 and earlier, warning that this was the last time to ever upgrade to CS6 if they wanted to be able to qualify for future upgrade to CS7. At the time they already knew they had decided to cancel the CS7 purchase model though. So for any of those people who would have been OK with the rental model of CC, they basically suckered them all in to spend hundreds to thousands of dollars for basically nothing.


Anyway it's really the rental model that most dislike and that is the real issue.


----------



## kaihp (Jul 30, 2015)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> Not really since they all they have been doing is plugging in the new camera interpretations to just get the camera file decoded and nothing more, that's basically just a stock internal plug-in inside of ACR and it really shouldn't require much, if any extra testing at all.



This is probably the biggest fallacy of all in development: that you don't need to test "trivial" changes.
Ugh, I feel old to say this, but:
More than 20 years of product development have told me and my colleagues this simple truth:
*IF IT AIN'T TESTED, IT AIN'T GONNA WORK*
It goes for all the disciplines I've seen: Software, Electronics, Mechanical, IC development, _everything_.


----------



## AvTvM (Jul 30, 2015)

Adobe maintains exactly one Raw module and adds support for new cameras/lenses as needed. 
This single piece of software works with lightroom cc, photoshop cc, lightroom perpetual license and for photoshop ps/cs. There is no development/significant testing involved, whether ACR works with 3 or 4 other pieces of Adobe software. They just ingest the same "output" from that raw developer module and then do their thing.

The only reason adobe cuts multi 100 dollars ps/cs 6 from future versions of ACR is an attempt to force users into their creative rental cloud. It is gouging and despicable and people are totally correct to criticize adobe for their customer-hostile business practices.


----------



## YuengLinger (Jul 30, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> YuengLinger said:
> 
> 
> > cayenne said:
> ...



Are you saying that we can stop paying for CC and open our .psd or .tif files and print them? Using what program??? Can I continue to use the Print module in LR CC if I'm not paying, making fine adjustments for different papers, crop sizes etc? I need the Develop module to soft-proof for glossy, luster, matte, etc. So, if I stop paying, are my prints restricted to the last used paper type? Hmmm?

If I'm ignorant, it's because of Adobe's marketing, using the carrot of promo rates and the stick of "your software will stop working!"


----------



## Stu_bert (Jul 30, 2015)

kaihp said:


> LetTheRightLensIn said:
> 
> 
> > Not really since they all they have been doing is plugging in the new camera interpretations to just get the camera file decoded and nothing more, that's basically just a stock internal plug-in inside of ACR and it really shouldn't require much, if any extra testing at all.
> ...



So let the community test it...


----------



## ifp (Jul 30, 2015)

Stu_bert said:


> Apparently, and I did not see the original announcement, but Adobe said they would continue to support new cameras and lenses. Rather than say it's costing them too much so they cant do it, they've done a u turn, *and* apparently changed the website. Change ACR to freeware, and allow individuals to test and raise issues - just as we did with previous Beta releases would significantly alleviate any costs. Change the model and I am sure most users would accept the compromise. And many users help out via forums...



User testing might be useful for late stage development, where they think most of the bugs are wrung out and need more hardware configurations tested, along with unthought of use cases. For early development, it'd be overwhelming. Just to deal with the 1000s of bug reports that would come in per day in early stages would be extremely burdensome.



Stu_bert said:


> Or, opensource the code and allow others to maintain it. No overhead on Adobe, especially if they are going to develop a new ACR for LR/PS which is their original justification.



That's never going to happen. I'm sure there are large chunks of their code tied up in proprietary licensing agreements.


----------



## Stu_bert (Jul 30, 2015)

AvTvM said:


> Adobe maintains exactly one Raw module and adds support for new cameras/lenses as needed.
> This single piece of software works with lightroom cc, photoshop cc, lightroom perpetual license and for photoshop ps/cs. There is no development/significant testing involved, whether ACR works with 3 or 4 other pieces of Adobe software. They just ingest the same "output" from that raw developer module and then do their thing.
> 
> The only reason adobe cuts multi 100 dollars ps/cs 6 from future versions of ACR is an attempt to force users into their creative rental cloud. It is gouging and despicable and people are totally correct to criticize adobe for their customer-hostile business practices.



I have no problem with them changing their position, developing a new raw engine which they dont want to integrate with old versions of their SW. I accept that Adobe has the right to cease development on ACR and perpetual LR. Ironically therefore in some ways, I have rented the Sw from Adobe, as eventually it will cease to be useful to me and therefore I will need to look at alternatives.

But Adobe does not want to really help the "little guy", so they don't want to solve the problem and give options. Which is their right. I may not agree, but I respect their rights. I retain the right to dispute their motives... ;D

Fortunately I'm happy with my eco-system of LR, Photoshop, Topaz and Nik and like "older" sensor tech, while it does what I want, I will stick with it until something more compelling arrives. CC versions don't have sufficient to entice.

Ironically also, if Adobe had offered me some "buy-back" of my LR and PS licenses - not at full price - against a CC sub then I would have probably changed.

Finally, there was a comparative article on Dpreview last year IIRC - looked at DxO, C1, LR... none of them were leaps and bounds ahead, so the market is competitive. PS less so, but then how much of PS functionality do you use on editing your photos? 10% of PS?


----------



## ifp (Jul 30, 2015)

AvTvM said:


> Adobe maintains exactly one Raw module and adds support for new cameras/lenses as needed.
> This single piece of software works with lightroom cc, photoshop cc, lightroom perpetual license and for photoshop ps/cs. There is no development/significant testing involved, whether ACR works with 3 or 4 other pieces of Adobe software. They just ingest the same "output" from that raw developer module and then do their thing.



Your point has already been addressed:



kaihp said:


> This is probably the biggest fallacy of all in development: that you don't need to test "trivial" changes.
> Ugh, I feel old to say this, but:
> More than 20 years of product development have told me and my colleagues this simple truth:
> *IF IT AIN'T TESTED, IT AIN'T GONNA WORK*
> It goes for all the disciplines I've seen: Software, Electronics, Mechanical, IC development, _everything_.


----------



## Stu_bert (Jul 30, 2015)

ifp said:


> Stu_bert said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Agreed. But this is stable code. New lenses, just a bunch of geometrics stats. A lookup table or whatever the modern equivalent is. New bodies with similar sensor tech, a little bit of code dev.

Remember we are not expecting new features. That would indeed indicate more significant testing.



ifp said:


> Stu_bert said:
> 
> 
> > Or, opensource the code and allow others to maintain it. No overhead on Adobe, especially if they are going to develop a new ACR for LR/PS which is their original justification.
> ...



Agreed, there is an IP hurdle. I believe they own all the IP as most of the raw engine was developed by Thomas Knoll (who wrote PS with his brother). The rest was Adobe employees.

I still offered 2 other models 

Ultimately they don't want to solve it, which is why most people dispute their motives, citing technical hurdles for a product which at best is only in development. They want you on their cloud version, thank you. Ironic also, as they are clearly not interested in people who want perpetual and/or the non-pro users, but why not just be honest:

*Adobe:* _ We don't want to maintain anything for perpetually-licensed SW. Our future is all about rental. We appreciate that we were not totally open about this previously, but rather than do things in an underhand manner, we want to come clean. We respect your right to chose, and would like you to migrate to our CC versions, but understand this is not for everyone._

I know, it's like hoping for an honest politician... but hey, this is a forum ;D


----------



## AshtonNekolah (Jul 30, 2015)

today i happen to dl the latest dng converter people need to get over cr2 or what every camera files they have, and go DNG, there is no image quality loss at all, save the hype I ran my own comparison side by side dont stress your selves over this go to the universal standard and be happy although im on CC 2014 im not upgrading any time soon even if i get new bodies, you better believe I will always have to option to convert my files no matter what adobe says.
I got the converter cause sometimes I like the option of not having to run lightroom,


----------



## NancyP (Jul 30, 2015)

Stubert, that's why I predict that someone will try to make a LR plug-in providing codec interpretation.


----------



## kelpdiver (Jul 31, 2015)

ifp said:


> Your point has already been addressed:



hardly.

automated testing is cheap and easy. Though I rather doubt that they bother to test ACR on every product they have that includes it against a RAW file from every canikon(+sony crap) camera that they have RAW profiles for. There's no need. Model profiles are a modular bit of code (or they have much much bigger problems). Create a new model, process a raw file on each (automatically), call it a day. 

Sorry guys...there is no technical barrier here.


----------



## AvTvM (Jul 31, 2015)

NancyP said:


> Stubert, that's why I predict that someone will try to make a LR plug-in providing codec interpretation.



Actually, i would love to get Canon DPP's RAW engine doing the RAW conversion in my perpetual license Lightroom - instead of Adobe's ACR module. It yields better colours for Canon Raws.

Maybe there is a way to swap out the RAW engine and still maintain LR features and user interface. I'd be willibg to buy such a hack, unless i have to pay monthly rent for it.


----------



## Stu_bert (Jul 31, 2015)

NancyP said:


> Stubert, that's why I predict that someone will try to make a LR plug-in providing codec interpretation.



Hi NancyP - i don't think the sdk supports that... would be good if it did or if someone finds a way


----------



## Stu_bert (Jul 31, 2015)

Really funny (well to me)... I got an email to complete an Adobe survey this morning

"Adobe Creative Cloud Subscription options. The survey should take about 15-20 minutes to complete"

I got to the 3rd page and it asked me how likely I was to subscribe and I said very unlikely. 

The survey ended!

Oops, maybe I should have lied and said quite unlikely to see where the survey went.


----------



## drs (Aug 1, 2015)

Subscription, tried it, canceled it, replacing apps now where possible since (e.g., looking forward to Fusion)-- I'm just not a pay per month type of a user. I have paid since a quarter century too much to Adobe. I have trained a large number of people with Adobe-products, not any more. ... and I do not miss it. 

In all fairness, since LR is being offered, it is OK with me. It's time to move on anyway.

)


----------



## Skirball (Aug 5, 2015)

I would sign up for CC subscription in a heart beat, if I wasn't limited by the DR of Canon sensors. That's really the heart of the issue.


----------



## Stu_bert (Aug 6, 2015)

Skirball said:


> I would sign up for CC subscription in a heart beat, if I wasn't limited by the DR of Canon sensors. That's really the heart of the issue.



;D ;D ;D


----------



## JhnMhn (Sep 7, 2015)

Reading the many posts here & elsewhere re: Adobe CC problems, dissatisfaction, and lack of innovating anything new/useful since going to the cloud confirms all the reasons I refused to go past CS6.
Have saved $$ not sending any more money to a company that hasn't offered anything I need with its new Cloud/constant-hand-in-my-wallet scheme. I make my living from photography and find Adobe an unreliable software source. Actually, I'm pleased they did this, they have made a great opportunity for their competitors that have really improved since Adobe sent them so many new customers.
More competent software players in the game benefits us. I'll be switching to Affinity Photo this year and only see Adobe in the rear view mirror.
Oh, and although I'm happy with my 5D IIIs, I wouldn't mind more dynamic range. ; > }


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 7, 2015)

JhnMhn said:


> Reading the many posts here & elsewhere re: Adobe CC problems, dissatisfaction, and lack of innovating anything new/useful since going to the cloud confirms all the reasons I refused to go past CS6.
> Have saved $$ not sending any more money to a company that hasn't offered anything I need with its new Cloud/constant-hand-in-my-wallet scheme. I make my living from photography and find Adobe an unreliable software source. Actually, I'm pleased they did this, they have made a great opportunity for their competitors that have really improved since Adobe sent them so many new customers.
> More competent software players in the game benefits us. I'll be switching to Affinity Photo this year and only see Adobe in the rear view mirror.
> Oh, and although I'm happy with my 5D IIIs, I wouldn't mind more dynamic range. ; > }



That is your prerogative, personally I have found more than enough new stuff in CC to not look back, or worry about the $7.99 a month which wouldn't buy me two coffees in Starbucks.

Just having ACR as a Smart filter is a very cool feature. Getting Print Size back in the view menu was a silly feature I really missed and use an incredible amount. Dehaze is a remarkable slider. Artboards, if you never use them then great, if you do it is a welcome upgrade. Synchronization across devices has been taken to a new level. The list of small features, improvements and upgrades goes on and on.

The point is PS is a mature product, but they do keep reworking features to make them better and more efficient and whilst much of the work is behind the scenes it is a better product, for instance Smart Sharpen is much better than it used to be, still called the same thing and in the same place, no fanfare, but much improved. Personally I can't fathom a pro photographer not having CC, I stuck my head in the sand for too long and am happy I now have it.


----------



## JhnMhn (Sep 7, 2015)

Glad your happy with PS, many of us aren't.

I won't go into all the real world costs with CC, but "$7.99 a month" is incomplete, yet still nearly twice for a single year what the one time purchase price is for what I'm moving to. And I'm not naive enough to believe CC isn't going to increase in cost to whatever Adobe believes the market will bear. We are faced with an increasing number of various service providers that think another $5, $10, $15 isn't anything to "worry about". These seemingly small costs add up and are not insignificant when making your entire income from photography. I've made my living from photography from well before PS existed, and have used PS since way before the CS versions. I'm increasingly underwhelmed with it, and Adobe's CC marketing approach.

They certainly have the right to run their business as they see fit. We have the right to say no thanks and go elsewhere.

Again, I have no problem with your being happy with it; but many of us aren't...and it doesn't mean we have our heads "in the sand". My business runs fine without CC. And with the rapidly improving Affinity Photo, which already runs more trouble-free on my Mac, will soon do just fine without CS6. "Mature" in software terms all to often means it is saddled with lots of ancient and trouble-prone code that is near impossible to resolve without starting over.

I don't mean to be argumentative, but those of us disenchanted with CC and looking elsewhere haven't come to our conclusions capriciously.

More choice and competition is a good thing.


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 7, 2015)

$7.99 per month is not incomplete.

That you don't see the value in that is fine by me, but what you are doing is what so many people do, you make bold comments like _"I have no problem with your being happy with it; *but many of us aren't...*"_ yet freely admit _"I refused to go past CS6"_. You pass judgement on a lack of innovation without ever trying the product, which I find a weak argument. I have tried the product and the lack of innovation meme is a flawed one.

Market forces dictate price and value, Adobe have millions of subscribers at $7.99 and up, that Afinity can only charge $49.99 for a 'perpetual' license says something about their perceived value.


----------



## JhnMhn (Sep 7, 2015)

I refused to go past CS6 because the friend's CC I tried extensively underwhelmed me. As I said, those of us finding alternatives to CC have not come to our conclusions capriciously.

Clearly we find each other's arguments "weak". That's fine, I'm not offended that you disagree. At least we can do it without being disagreeable.

Peace.


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 7, 2015)

If you, personally, don't find the value in the feature set you'd be a fool to buy into it, like a 50MP camera or an 11-24 lens, if you have no need for it the fact that it is made is irrelevant. But saying things like _"lack of innovating anything new/useful since going to the cloud"_ is not fair or accurate, that the new and innovative features are not ones you personally want I well understand, but they are not the same thing.

Adobe PS and LR are the market leaders by a very long way because of the feature set, besides, as a business I can write down 100% of a "rental" agreement but I have to depreciate software bought outright, CC improves my cash flow and tax situation. Part of my lack of comprehension of pro photographers rebutting the new model comes from my belief they are poor business people for not grasping that.

I am happy to agree to differ, I am not happy when people say generalisations that are not true, especially without framing them as specific to personal needs.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Sep 8, 2015)

I'm happy so far with the CC package, I've three years at the same price ($100) by purchasing in advance. Buying in advance also locks the price in.

Certainly, the price will go up. Wages and benefits go up, taxes and rents go up, other software will increase as well. The price potentially rising is a pretty lame argument.

You probably don't buy a brand of car if they raise their prices?


----------



## JhnMhn (Sep 8, 2015)

If I was a poor business person I wouldn't have supported myself with photography for over 30yrs. I'm building a new house and have a new car and will soon be debt free.. Not that any of this should matter, but this is devolving into the usual personal insult fest that seems to occur when someone says why they are leaving Adobe. 

I'm outta here...gotta go make some more of those poor business decisions. ; > )


----------

