FORUMS: list search recent posts

Adobe.com

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Dennis Radeke
Adobe.com
on Jun 18, 2014 at 3:34:11 pm

I don't often post a new thread, but thought it would be worth noting that Adobe.com has a new look and a bunch of things to view.

If you're not interested, no problem - sorry to intrude! ;-)


Return to posts index

Andy Field
Re: Adobe.com
on Jun 18, 2014 at 4:49:20 pm

Is one of this things the NAB announced premiere and AE updates?


Return to posts index

Marcus Moore
Re: Adobe.com
on Jun 18, 2014 at 5:21:52 pm

Likely- Scott Simmons on twitter is saying not to expect too many surprises on the video side. We got our news at NAB.


Return to posts index


Steve Connor
Re: Adobe.com
on Jun 18, 2014 at 5:26:34 pm

Just watching the very reserved Jason Levine demo it on the livestream

Steve Connor
Mellowing slowly


Return to posts index

Phil Hoppes
Re: Adobe.com
on Jun 18, 2014 at 5:44:38 pm

Yea.... Jason is such a quiet and reserved individual. It's too bad he's not excited about what he's doing. ;-)


Return to posts index



Kevin Monahan
Re: Adobe.com
on Jun 18, 2014 at 7:03:12 pm

Hi Andy,
I've been up on the new Adobe.com for a few hours now. I'm surprised you're still getting that screen. Can you refresh your browser or try another browser?

Thanks,
Kevin

Kevin Monahan
Support Product Manager—DVA
Adobe After Effects
Adobe Premiere Pro
Adobe
Follow Me on Twitter!


Return to posts index

David Mathis
Re: Adobe.com
on Jun 18, 2014 at 7:07:46 pm

Works for me though the first time it said it was unavailable. Most likely a glitch gremlin on the loose.

Final Cut Pro 10.1.1, Final Cut Studio 3, Motion 5.1, Resolve 10, Pixelmator, Blackmagic Cinema Camera 2.5K, 7 to X


Return to posts index

Andy Neil
Re: Adobe.com
on Jun 18, 2014 at 8:04:57 pm

Well, I finally got past the first couple pages before hitting this...



It made me chuckle. It's currently 4pm EST. At least I got to see one smallish AE video. Can anyone run down what exactly is new about the site? I don't lurk adobe's site much so I'm not sure what's new or not. Or maybe Steve could link to the demo he was watching?

Andy

https://plus.google.com/u/0/107277729326633563425/videos


Return to posts index


Steve Connor
Re: Adobe.com
on Jun 18, 2014 at 8:08:36 pm

Twas a (poor) livestream and has now disappeared, can't believe they haven't put the "whats new" videos live yet.

Steve Connor
Mellowing slowly


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: Adobe.com
on Jun 18, 2014 at 9:22:58 pm

The documentation is close to useless. Wait - did I say close to? No. It is useless. Tutorials that are so outdated that it is laughable. And no way to search a proper INDEX? If you have a real problem then commit to spending at least four hours on the phone to India (and to be fair they do every once in a while solve a problem.) Premiere Pro CC is at best very buggy. I have to restart frequently. Sadly I have no choice. I look forward to a world where massive companies make more than a cursory effort to solve users problems. I wish the Coen brothers the best of luck. I hope they improve things for all of us.

Tim


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Adobe.com
on Jun 18, 2014 at 9:29:54 pm

watching the opening video.

Am I "sticking my finger in the stream and changing it"? God I hope I am. It sounds transgressive.

that opening video went on for a long time. god forgive me I started to irrationally dislike nearly every talking head in it.

oh, now Shantanyu's on stage. yaaaayyy.

"advertising is content and content is advertising" so that's Shantanyu's first key point.

that really warmed the cockles of my heart. I'm turning it off now.

no wait. - he apparently wants people to see the creative cloud and the marketing cloud as melded into one.

fabulous.

Shantanhya read a ten minute speech in six minutes there. That's the last time he'll be willing to do that for a while.

Adobe is a stunningly genuine company, lead by genuine people talking genuinely about all the things that lead them to mass forced subscription.

http://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index


TImothy Auld
Re: Adobe.com
on Jun 18, 2014 at 9:57:03 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] " started to irrationally dislike nearly every talking head in it.
"


It's not irrational.

Tim


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Adobe.com
on Jun 18, 2014 at 10:29:29 pm

I wonder at points who they are even talking to anymore -

on muse, the one piece of software everyone alive has decided not to use, they demonstrated a facility for clients to alter and modify websites without calling on the website designer - then the two guys said this insane thing that they had heard from web designers that this was a major request - where they never see a penny again for website modifications by having handed off to their client a client controlled modifiable lego construction of the website.

you would feel muse has a bright, turkeys for christmas future.

and they kept saying that designers - on their super interesting poll census - told them they really needed to be more and more productive, and that designers felt they needed to be across all areas, end to end, as strategists through to client sell - presumably marketing strategists. because that's a delicious concept.

the narrative of adobe as a company is fairly bizarre. On some level the hapless subscription designer is starting to feel a wee bit soylent green. Adobe seem to see, and architect, their software processes to transform their former customers into low grade mulch to marketing driven workflows.

just a lovely company.

(and if the PS+LR+the kitchen sink $9.99 per month mega deal guaranteed forever isn't a visible hail mary that indicates super bad CC take up in photography, then I'm a banana.)

http://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: Adobe.com
on Jun 18, 2014 at 10:43:05 pm

I spent an entire afternoon with Muse before I realized it didn't do anything that anybody could possibly want. As for Adobe, who really knows? If they think they are going to make a fortune off teaching new businesses how to market, then golly gosh! Best of luck.

Tim


Return to posts index


Gary Huff
Re: Adobe.com
on Jun 18, 2014 at 10:49:59 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "(and if the PS+LR+the kitchen sink $9.99 per month mega deal guaranteed forever isn't a visible hail mary that indicates super bad CC take up in photography, then I'm a banana.)"

Well, yes, the photographic package is pretty much feature-complete for what the vast majority of people using it are going to actually do with it, so you need to make the subscription cheap enough to be a no-brainer.


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Adobe.com
on Jun 19, 2014 at 12:14:46 am

[Gary Huff] " so you need to make the subscription cheap enough to be a no-brainer."

yes, for a period you do. until you have the subscriptions. they already lead in today's demonstration on the inability of the CS6 suite to handle above 2K in the video demo. they were very clear that was a full stop.

Also - did anyone at all feel the company Wadwahni guy was mad dismissive to that poor guy Levine? Who badly tried to run a happy loud vibe?
Adobe seems a weird company to me - one that seems visibly controlled by blade sharp people running fenced enclosures for the heartfelt people we interact with.

Adobe board and corporate will almost certainly execute CS6 and prior hardware and operating system lockouts over the next two years. that is going to include photoshop.
the photographers are being temporarily treated with the biggest kid gloves: everyone is, engineering staff and subscribers alike.

http://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index

Gary Huff
Re: Adobe.com
on Jun 19, 2014 at 12:35:15 am

[Aindreas Gallagher] "Adobe board and corporate will almost certainly execute CS6 and prior hardware and operating system lockouts over the next two years. that is going to include photoshop."

Adobe is under no obligation to anyone to keep CS6 going through two more OSX and one more Windows OS updates.


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Adobe.com
on Jun 19, 2014 at 1:10:16 am
Last Edited By Aindreas Gallagher on Jun 19, 2014 at 1:28:18 am

[Gary Huff] "Adobe is under no obligation to anyone "

I know - but it goes to the trust of the company - tell me you entirely trust this crowd. given the scale of monopoly involved.

forget premiere - adobe have a mortal lock on PS AE ILL PDF ID.

that is a lot of monopoly. The creative cloud show was - and remains - a PR construct masking forced customer subscription.

that's all it ever was.

As customers we like the tools, we like many of the staff involved and yet - via the predilections of the board we are all being sent together to some final marketing hell.

explain that.

http://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index

Gary Huff
Re: Adobe.com
on Jun 19, 2014 at 3:53:17 am

[Aindreas Gallagher] "that is a lot of monopoly. The creative cloud show was - and remains - a PR construct masking forced customer subscription."

That is not a monopoly. That is people obstinately refusing to use anything other, even as they bash Adobe with all the hatred they can muster.

It's a strange dichotomy, almost like those who return to Apple time and time again, paying to be beta testers and grudgingly accepting whatever they give them.


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Adobe.com
on Jun 20, 2014 at 10:58:36 pm

[Gary Huff] "That is not a monopoly."

for starters it is Gary - AE PS ILLUS and ID represent massive market specific monopolies - if you don't think those effective monopolies are informing board level decisions on forced subscription then I have a bridge to sell you.

[Gary Huff] "That is people obstinately refusing to use anything other"

none of us have any form of market level client realistic alternatives available. The problem is that we know it, and adobe know it very well.

that is why they just stripped all license ownership from nine million people and set about engaging remote DRM licensing for local software you previously owned and now are asked to rent.

this is not rocket science.

http://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: Adobe.com
on Jun 20, 2014 at 11:43:51 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "they just stripped all license ownership from nine million people and set about engaging remote DRM licensing for local software"

Yes, that is exactly what they have done. Will they get away with it? Probably. But I hope not.

Tim


Return to posts index

Gary Huff
Re: Adobe.com
on Jun 18, 2014 at 10:42:08 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "oh, now Shantanyu's on stage. yaaaayyy. "advertising is content and content is advertising" so that's Shantanyu's first key point. that really warmed the cockles of my heart. I'm turning it off now."

Really? I would think you'd be hanging on every word, considering how much you wanted him to come out and give you platitudes when some of the online services went down.


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: Adobe.com
on Jun 18, 2014 at 10:43:55 pm

Really? That's all you've got?

Tim


Return to posts index

Gary Huff
Re: Adobe.com
on Jun 18, 2014 at 10:46:56 pm

[TImothy Auld] " Really? That's all you've got?"

Well, that depends. Did it really take you four hours on the phone with Adobe support to figure out how to resize a video in the timeline?


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: Adobe.com
on Jun 18, 2014 at 10:51:23 pm

No. It took me hours to try to figure out why none of my Adobe CC applications would load - just as they had done the previous day.

Tim


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: Adobe.com
on Jun 18, 2014 at 10:52:28 pm

Got an answer to that, tough guy?

Tim


Return to posts index

Gary Huff
Re: Adobe.com
on Jun 18, 2014 at 10:54:56 pm

[Timothy Auld] "Got an answer to that, tough guy?"

Yes. Thank you for finally answering the question that I had posed to you six days ago.


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: Adobe.com
on Jun 18, 2014 at 10:57:21 pm

Would you cite that, please.

Tim


Return to posts index

Gary Huff
Re: Adobe.com
on Jun 18, 2014 at 11:02:09 pm

[TImothy Auld] "
Would you cite that, please."


Sorry, no.


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: Adobe.com
on Jun 18, 2014 at 11:04:51 pm

I'm guessing it's because you can't.

Tim


Return to posts index

Scott Witthaus
Re: Adobe.com
on Jun 19, 2014 at 1:19:06 am

Easy there, fellas. It's just software...

Scott Witthaus
Senior Editor/Post Production Supervisor
1708 Inc./Editorial
Professor, VCU Brandcenter


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: Adobe.com
on Jun 20, 2014 at 9:38:12 pm

Really, Scott. It's only software? I think you just called me out as a troll. What's the rational there, Ace?

Tim


Return to posts index

Gary Huff
Re: Adobe.com
on Jun 21, 2014 at 1:32:27 pm
Last Edited By Gary Huff on Jun 21, 2014 at 1:32:44 pm

[TImothy Auld] "What's the rational there, Ace?"

I would say it's because you engaged me for nothing specific to any point. It was, actually, quite childish.


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Adobe.com
on Jun 18, 2014 at 11:33:26 pm

yes, that said he was incredibly flat and nervous - so that's something.

the pen ruler tools in hardware and software are a bit amazing tho? I can't think of another company bearing down on ipad glass like they did there. there is a fair bit of valid wandering around.

also I haven't checked it, and its one of the things that fell apart in the 28 hour outage, but if adobe really are standing out front of the designer with 40,000 dollars worth of arranged typography in CC - in that case it's hard not to think they are doing globally transformative heavy lifting on their end to allow quality typography understanding and usage at all scales. that would be a bit of a netflix moment.

sure they better have at least Accidenz-Grotesk if not the full helvetica. or DIN mittelschrift and stuff? Some tiny bits of the Hoefler & Frere-Jones divorce maybe? boom boom.

edit:

they've now got a tiny bit of bodoni, they've sort of got futura - they've actually got news gothic but forget bembo or anything. forget most everything else. It kind of doesn't represent a valid toolset. the other stuff is near random. I suppose we're intended to cycle through font selections in photoshop and pick the thing that looks zany. just as in the demo.

I'm very curious where they came up with the forty thousand dollar figure. I'm sure it cost them a ton to get what they have from the major type families, but there is no way that's forty grands worth of fonts. news gothic particularly is super hobbled.

http://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index

Phil Hoppes
Re: Adobe.com
on Jun 19, 2014 at 1:09:23 am

Actually it's quite easy to come up with 40G's in fonts. Just on a whim I went to a professional font site (http://www.typography.com) and picked a font at random. (Acropolis). That font for webuse only is $149.00. 40K/150 = 266 fonts. That is not really that many fonts. I'm not claiming to have any knowledge of what Adobe charges or has charged in the past but fonts are not cheap. I picked up a specific font for a customer that they wanted and that was $50. By my same metric, at $50 each you only come to around 780 fonts. That's not thousands that I believed they mentioned in the presentation so if they really have thousands of fonts, that part at least, sounds like a pretty good deal. I'm not going to get into the subscription argument, I'm just saying, thousands of fonts included is not bad, assuming they are not garbage.


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Adobe.com
on Jun 19, 2014 at 7:33:01 am

[Phil Hoppes] " I'm just saying, thousands of fonts included is not bad, assuming they are not garbage."

Almost every time I need a particular font for a client, it's not in Typekit!

Steve Connor
Mellowing slowly


Return to posts index

Bobby Mosca
Re: Adobe.com
on Jun 19, 2014 at 12:53:45 pm

One leads a charmed life if hanging on the phone for an afternoon to get something fixed is the ultimate injustice.

It was just a PR product announcement and demo, people. Relax, sit down, have a sandwich, drink a class of milk, do some f-in' thing, eh?


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Adobe.com
on Jun 21, 2014 at 10:50:59 pm

that's the thing - typekit functions best for café newsletters.

If adobe really wanted to outright justify the creative cloud they would do something in the line Jeff Bezos would do - spend a ton of money and transformatively alter a market for the betterment of their subscribers.

some kind of per use type payments mediated by adobe, selected full top tier type foundries fonts available at massive scale agreed discounts - whatever they can come up with and pay for - interstate say as marquee offering. as landlords they need to start buying furniture.

whatever they can come up with that says that the subscriber situation has fundamentally new benefits - as opposed to flakey remote DRM on software previously owned. And can we forget all the endless Kuler tablet drawing on glass malarky. that has real, do I know anyone mad for it, credibility limits. It seems like a cheap easy iOS app thing for them to make a PR push out of. It smacks of no effort.

they need something that would say that they are serious about the balance of the landlord role. They need to install some serious tenant furnishings for this rental money. not offer meaningless 20GB and a sharing service that can't even preview video. I could care less about their stupid tablet drawing apps they've been working on apparently for so many years.

Adobe need to outlay some serious cash - the press they would receive for globally bettering the designers position on accessible premiere typography would alone be worth something.

http://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index

Dennis Radeke
Re: Adobe.com
on Jun 24, 2014 at 2:28:19 am

[Aindreas Gallagher] "And can we forget all the endless Kuler tablet drawing on glass malarky. that has real, do I know anyone mad for it, credibility limits. It seems like a cheap easy iOS app thing for them to make a PR push out of. It smacks of no effort."

Ironically, I really like the Kuler application and its integration into more applications like After Effects. If you're doing motion graphics work, the Kuler app makes picking harmonious colors a real snap.

As to your other points, they are all good. Easy to say, sadly a bit harder to do continuously in reality. We do really try! On a completely personal note, I think the recent directions we're taking with things like Lightroom Mobile and Photoshop and the hardware are actually good efforts. Add value, make syncing a non-issue and gives you photos on your device automatically...Adobe Voice is also a great app that is leaning more towards video that solves a very basic presentation problem for non-technical users. Anyway, my two cents...


Return to posts index

Dominic Deacon
Re: Adobe.com
on Jun 19, 2014 at 9:55:15 pm

I'm not quite following how this works yet. I have the photoshop deal. So I open up the creative cloud app and click update on the Photoshop CC (2014) icon.

Now that it's done my undertanding is I should now have 2 seperate Photoshop CC applications on my computer. Is that correct? If so where is the new one hiding? Search program and files didn't bring it up and it's not hiding in the usual Adobe Program Files (x86) folder.

So I assume the old icon is the new app but it doesn't seem to have motion blur gallery or any of the new additions. Could someone explain it to me? I'm feeling dumb.


Return to posts index

Gary Huff
Re: Adobe.com
on Jun 19, 2014 at 10:20:09 pm

[Dominic Deacon] "Adobe Program Files (x86)"

It wouldn't be in there, that's for 32-bit software.


Return to posts index

Dominic Deacon
Re: Adobe.com
on Jun 19, 2014 at 10:22:08 pm

Ahh right you are Sir. Found it.


Return to posts index

Rich Rubasch
Re: Adobe.com
on Jun 20, 2014 at 3:27:14 am

In the past, with the Final Cut Studio, I would simply rename my app file with a unique name so that the new installer would simply create a new file and NOT delete the old one. I did this with the CS series too. I ALWAYS ran both the old version and the new updated version, at least for a while.

In fact, I just deleted all CS 5.1 versions from our computers today as we upgrade to Mavericks.

Isn't the renaming workflow viable with the CC versions? In other words, by simply renaming the old app file will the new installer create a new app file? Then you could run both and dip your toes into the new stuff without breaking the tried and true installation so you can get work done!

Rich Rubasch
Tilt Media Inc.
Video Production, Post, Studio Sound Stage
Founder/President/Editor/Designer/Animator
http://www.tiltmedia.com


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Adobe.com
on Jun 20, 2014 at 3:30:13 am

[Rich Rubasch] "Isn't the renaming workflow viable with the CC versions? In other words, by simply renaming the old app file will the new installer create a new app file? Then you could run both and dip your toes into the new stuff without breaking the tried and true installation so you can get work done!"

CC 2014 installs as a new application -- no renaming required. It does not replace the previous installation of CC, and you can run both.

Walter Soyka
Designer & Mad Scientist at Keen Live [link]
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
@keenlive [twitter]   |   RenderBreak [blog]   |   Profile [LinkedIn]


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: Adobe.com
on Jun 21, 2014 at 12:03:08 am

Get your documentation and support in order. It is a disaster.

Tim


Return to posts index

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
© 2017 CreativeCOW.net All Rights Reserved
[TOP]