FORUMS: list search recent posts

Compromise: It's as Bad as Congress with this Issue

COW Forums : Adobe Creative Cloud Debate

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Jim Wiseman
Compromise: It's as Bad as Congress with this Issue
on May 31, 2013 at 4:10:50 am

Walter Soyka: (And it's rather an enormous amount of work they've done in that year!)

I'm sure it was, and they should be congratulated. It calls attention to the point that someone made earlier. The main determinant for feature release will be talented engineering man hours available and development budgets to hire them, regardless of Creative Cloud or Perpetual. Wish I could balance Speedgrade and the other possible new bells and whistles with the lack of license ownership, but for me the wall at the end of the alley is not worth it. Not that I wouldn't like to have them. Yes, I know I can pay $75 for a month, but that is not how artists work. Access is necessary when inspiration strikes. And believe me there are true artists using this software that have an emotional attachment beyond the software engineering or use of it for profit. It is hard to get that through the heads of all the business people around here. No feature I can think of is worth it. It's getting as bad as Congress around this issue. Compromise is a dirty word. Fox News and MSNBC.

Why can't someone at Adobe accept a compromise that allows for rent to own or a buyout? It is not exactly a new concept. Can't we all get most of what we want here? Or is this the beginning of we know what is best for you?

Jim Wiseman
Sony PMW-EX1,Pana AJ-D810 DVCPro, DVX-100, Nikon D7000, Final Cut Studio 2 and 3, Media 100 Suite 2.1.3, Premiere Pro 5.5 and 6.0, AJA ioHD, AJA Kona LHi, Avid MC, Hexacore MacPro 3.33 Ghz 24Gb RAM GTX-285 120GB SSD, Macbook Pro 17" 2011 2.2 Ghz Quadcore i7 8Gb SSD, G5 Quadcore PCIe


Return to posts index

Chris Borjis
Re: Compromise: It's as Bad as Congress with this Issue
on May 31, 2013 at 5:24:53 pm

I can't imagine anyone being against a buyout option...Adobe should offer it
after a reasonable subscription time at the very least.



Return to posts index

Tom Daigon
Re: Compromise: It's as Bad as Congress with this Issue
on May 31, 2013 at 5:27:58 pm

And imagine what good it would do their PR to become"the good guys that really listen" again. People would flock back and happily invest in the CC.

Tom Daigon
PrP / After Effects Editor
HP Z820 Dual 2687
64GB ram
Dulce DQg2 16TB raid
http://www.hdshotsandcuts.com
http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLfV20RTBQmUxgDXDkRHDC_j2f62vBUF_n&fea...


Return to posts index


Tim Dowse
Re: Compromise: It's as Bad as Congress with this Issue
on May 31, 2013 at 7:21:05 pm

[Jim Wiseman] Access is necessary when inspiration strikes. And believe me there are true artists using this software that have an emotional attachment beyond the software engineering or use of it for profit.

I genuinely feel for your position Jim (I've read many of your recent posts) but I suspect a customer in your specific position is probably a customer Adobe is prepared to lose. It's sad and unfortunate for you of course, but I suspect that might be the reality of it.

They are clearly aiming their CC applications at the professional market - i.e. people who make money from using the software. And they want to get a more regular stream of income from those folks.

FWIW, I think people who are making a little, but not much, money from using CC will probably benefit a lot. Just fire up a monthly subscription every time you get a gig, and it pays for itself in less than a day. Client comes back later for alterations to a project file? Fire up the subscription again, and fold that cost into the price of the alterations. Or if you're feeling kind, work for free for the first couple of hours (i.e. pay out of your own pocket for the subs).

The complaints comes from quite reasonable fears:
1. Fear that Adobe will jack up the prices
2. Fear that Adobe will stop innovating, but still charge monthly subs.

If a crystal ball could show that these fears are unfounded, I suspect most people would pay the subs. But we don't have a crystal ball, of course. Which is why I think the loyalty scheme would be a good compromise. Adobe have the incentive to maintain innovation and keep prices reasonable. Users have the incentive to keep paying, to keep their loyalty status intact.

Who the hell knows whether they'll do this. But if they do, I suspect they'll a large chunk of those currently concerned, and they'll be prepared to lose the remaining customers.

And the true artist can still get a perpetual CS6 license.


Return to posts index

Jim Wiseman
Re: Compromise: It's as Bad as Congress with this Issue
on May 31, 2013 at 8:07:29 pm

@Tim Dowse: I'm still a professional and I still make my living using this and other software. I'm not headed for the dustbin anytime soon. I have two good long term production contracts that pay all the bills. I can afford either. I just find the rental model reprehensible. I'm not speaking only for myself, I'm speaking for all independents, artists and others for whom this model makes absolutely no sense. People who use this software for something IN ADDITION to making a living from it. Also for artists who make a living from their art but live from one potentially large sale to another. This is software for creatives, isn't it?

It is not the cost per se, It is ultimately the dead end that is Creative Cloud for everyone eventually when they quit paying. In my mind software rental stinks, period. But I would still like to see some compromise.

Jim Wiseman
Sony PMW-EX1,Pana AJ-D810 DVCPro, DVX-100, Nikon D7000, Final Cut Studio 2 and 3, Media 100 Suite 2.1.3, Premiere Pro 5.5 and 6.0, AJA ioHD, AJA Kona LHi, Avid MC, Hexacore MacPro 3.33 Ghz 24Gb RAM GTX-285 120GB SSD, Macbook Pro 17" 2011 2.2 Ghz Quadcore i7 8Gb SSD, G5 Quadcore PCIe


Return to posts index

Tim Dowse
Re: Compromise: It's as Bad as Congress with this Issue
on May 31, 2013 at 8:23:41 pm

[Jim Wiseman] I'm still a professional and I still make my living using this and other software.

Fair enough Jim. I had the impression from your posts that your concern came from the fact that you saw your pro days winding down and you were pursuing passion projects. I hope I didn't offend.

I do think the CC is aimed at creative professionals though, and that means people who are making money. If one is creative, but isn't making money, I don't think that person sits in the center of Adobe's target market.

That said, as I mentioned earlier, I think people who are earning sporadic income are served well by the subs model, for the reason I stated earlier.

And one last point. It seems to me that many of the features on the bleeding edge of pro software development are about improving productivity. Something that is of a direct concern to folks who make money from the software.

The passionate amateur/part-time artist can surely still do just as well with CS6, even if it takes just a little longer than it would with CC. Perhaps I've missed some fuctionality in CC, but it seems more to do with speeding up workflows than actually creating something entirely unheard of before.


Return to posts index


Sandeep Sajeev
Re: Compromise: It's as Bad as Congress with this Issue
on May 31, 2013 at 8:47:25 pm

[Tim Dowse] I do think the CC is aimed at creative professionals though, and that means people who are making money. If one is creative, but isn't making money, I don't think that person sits in the center of Adobe's target market.

There are plenty of creatives who aren't making money. Look at how many Post Houses have shut down. We've all had to deal with late payments, checks that bounce, slippery clients who suddenly get really really busy when it comes time to pay up, etc. So I'd disagree that Adobe's target market is that person or organisation that is successful - their target market is basically anyone who can shell out 50 bucks.

It's like walking into a buffet, you're welcome as long as you can pay the fee, it doesn't matter what you're wearing. And just cause you ate here yesterday, doesn't mean we have to feed you today...

People will pay, CC will make Adobe a lot of money and that's really all there is to it. There isn't a corporation in existence that will take goodwill over cash anyway so expecting Adobe to is unrealistic. Someone give Shantanu a raise, he looks foolish in that clip that keeps getting posted, but he's played an absolute cold-blooded gun to the head and the safety's off, blinder.


Return to posts index

Tim Dowse
Re: Compromise: It's as Bad as Congress with this Issue
on Jun 3, 2013 at 8:16:05 pm

[Sandeep Sajeev] I'd disagree that Adobe's target market is that person or organisation that is successful - their target market is basically anyone who can shell out 50 bucks.

While Adobe will obviously be happy for anyone to buy their software, that doesn't put them in a target market. A guy might buy Cosmopolitan, but that doesn't mean the magazine is aimed at men. I believe Adobe will first and foremost try to please folks who use their software to make money. Large successful organizations are the ones they'd like to please most, because a single sale can result in hundreds of thousands of dollars in revenue. There are plenty of cheaper options for folks who don't need such a high level of productivity, not least products that Adobe themselves sell (Photoshop Elements, Premiere Elements).


[Jim Wiseman] How can it be called compatible if it ceases to work on new system software?

Do Adobe still support every single version of the software they've sold under perpetual license on the all subsequent operating systems? My guess is not. Not sure what the difference is with CS6.

[Jim Wiseman] Only the option for perpetual or a reasonable buyout...

I'd love to see this implemented, as I've said before, and I really hope they see all the support that this kind of option has out there.

[Clint Wardlow] However, if it is a long form or even complex short piece that requires lots of tweaking in post over a long period, then no.

Well, the current perpetual license of CS6 is over two year of CC subs. So, it'd have to be a hell of a long time doing constant tweaking. If you're just dipping in and out of it, then go month-by-month.

[Clint Wardlow] If getting paid is the indicator, then a guy like Van Gogh was an amateur. If making your living is the requirement, then 90% of published novelists don't fit the bill.

As I've said, I suspect Adobe may be prepared to lose those customers. I don't feel that Adobe have some kind of duty to provide tools for anyone who ever makes anything creative. That said, I suspect a man as committed as Van Gogh would have been prepared to shell out $50 per month for paint and brushes.

If money isn't your main concern, you don't need tools that massively improve productivity. You can be satisfied with tools that are much cheaper, but still allow you to produce art at a slightly slower pace.

[Clint Wardlow] I think ceding that broad user base will hurt Adobe. As students, educators, and beginning users seek and learn alternative cheaper software (particularly in photography and graphics), in the coming years as these folks rise in their professions they will feel less reliant on Adobe products IMHO.

Yes, I agree with the importance of students and educators, and have said they should figure out the education pricing situation elsewhere. Otherwise they'll be shooting themselves in the foot massively. Nevertheless, right now, if I was a graduating student starting out on my own, I'd much prefer to pay $70 on a month-by-month basis than $1500 in one lump.


Return to posts index

Jim Wiseman
Re: Compromise: It's as Bad as Congress with this Issue
on Jun 3, 2013 at 8:37:38 pm

@ Tim Dowse:

>[Clint Wardlow] If getting paid is the indicator, then a guy like Van Gogh was an amateur. If making your living is the requirement, then 90% of published novelists don't fit the bill.<

>[Tim Dowse] As I've said, I suspect Adobe may be prepared to lose those customers. I don't feel that Adobe have some kind of duty to provide tools for anyone who ever makes anything creative. That said, I suspect a man as committed as Van Gogh would have been prepared to shell out $50 per month for paint and brushes.<

He would have had a tough time doing that. He only sold one painting during his lifetime and died penniless. And his brother Theo was an art dealer who tirelessly promoted his work. He could not have afforded the CC model applied to painting. He probably would have committed suicide years earlier!

Adobe doesn't have a duty to provide tools, but it has certainly taken on a heavy responsibility for them.

Jim Wiseman
Sony PMW-EX1,Pana AJ-D810 DVCPro, DVX-100, Nikon D7000, Final Cut Studio 2 and 3, Media 100 Suite 2.1.3, Premiere Pro 5.5 and 6.0, AJA ioHD, AJA Kona LHi, Avid MC, Hexacore MacPro 3.33 Ghz 24Gb RAM GTX-285 120GB SSD, Macbook Pro 17" 2011 2.2 Ghz Quadcore i7 8Gb SSD, G5 Quadcore PCIe


Return to posts index

Tim Dowse
Re: Compromise: It's as Bad as Congress with this Issue
on Jun 3, 2013 at 9:01:31 pm

[Jim Wiseman] He only sold one painting during his lifetime and died penniless.

Well, you win the Van Gogh history contest :-) But he did buy canvases, paints and brushes though, did he not? Which probably cost a pretty penny back in those days. I think a man as committed as Van Gogh would have found a way.

That's assuming he could have afforded a computer to run the software in the first place.

[Jim Wiseman] Adobe doesn't have a duty to provide tools, but it has certainly taken on a heavy responsibility for them.

In my view, Adobe offsets this responsibility by offering "elements" software offerings at vastly reduced prices. If you want to make art, I think you can get by with the cheaper software that's widely available. You'll be missing some of the features that make the workflow fast as hell, but time is only money when you're a professional.


Return to posts index

Jim Wiseman
Re: Compromise: It's as Bad as Congress with this Issue
on Jun 4, 2013 at 3:33:14 am

[Tim Dowse] "In my view, Adobe offsets this responsibility by offering "elements" software offerings at vastly reduced prices. If you want to make art, I think you can get by with the cheaper software that's widely available. You'll be missing some of the features that make the workflow fast as hell, but time is only money when you're a professional.
"


Excuse me, Tim, but I find this comment to be downright insulting. "Art only needs kiddie toys but us big boys who make commercials and industrials and corporate productions need the 'real' tools so we can be fast." I have a BFA in Video Art and Video Systems Design from CalArts (Disney school) and an MFA in Video Art/Video Production from the School of the Art Institute of Chicago, both now $40k/year institutions. I finished my MFA while working as an AD on the multi-camera music program that became Soundstage and as a Producer at WTTW PBS Chicago doing documentaries and video art programs for broadcast. I built my own video synthesizers, and have been working with digital real time synthesizers since 1980. I've done broadcast quality video for my entire career, pioneering film style video since 1976 with TVTV and One Pass Video. (Look them up)

If I had been told the equivalent of Photoshop Elements was the level of tools I would be working with at the time I did my education, I would have laughed in their faces. If anything, true artistry in any field requires the best of tools, not the mediocre. If anything the commercial hack work can do with those. I've had to do a more than a bit of that as well.

My point, and I think Clint's as well, was that doing art is not in any way inferior to commercial "in the door out the door who gives a d**n if I ever see it again" production that so often occurs in the "I make enough money to cover Creative Cloud for the rest of my life" scenarios. Up until this fiasco, upgrades were affordable and the software and our work didn't disappear and was re-workable. Somehow I think the "doesn't disappear/re-workable" part is more important to artists and historical documentarians than those doing commercial projects. Maybe you are emotionally involved in your work as well. I know I am.

Vent over...

Jim Wiseman
Sony PMW-EX1,Pana AJ-D810 DVCPro, DVX-100, Nikon D7000, Final Cut Studio 2 and 3, Media 100 Suite 2.1.3, Premiere Pro 5.5 and 6.0, AJA ioHD, AJA Kona LHi, Avid MC, Hexacore MacPro 3.33 Ghz 24Gb RAM GTX-285 120GB SSD, Macbook Pro 17" 2011 2.2 Ghz Quadcore i7 8Gb SSD, G5 Quadcore PCIe


Return to posts index

Tim Dowse
Re: Compromise: It's as Bad as Congress with this Issue
on Jun 4, 2013 at 4:30:26 am

[Jim Wiseman] Excuse me, Tim, but I find this comment to be downright insulting. "Art only needs kiddie toys but us big boys who make commercials and industrials and corporate productions need the 'real' tools so we can be fast."

I apologize again Jim, I am not trying to be insulting or offend anyone. It's already clear you have an extremely impressive resume (certainly far far far far more impressive than mine). I wasn't referring to you personally with this comment, and I apologize if I am just coming across like some arrogant upstart.

I'm just offering up my opinion that artists who are so poor that they can't afford $600 per year for their software have other options. I suspect most artists will be able to swallow the $600 per year. I know painters who pay at least that for materials every year, and they aren't rich by any standard.

You mention that your degrees come from 40k/year institutions. Meaning that what I'm guessing took at least 5 years of study would cost 200k or more. An amount that would cover a CC subscription for 333 years at current prices. If an artist paid that much for their education, I suspect they'd be okay with $600 per year for their tools of trade.

[Jim Wiseman] My point, and I think Clint's as well, was that doing art is not in any way inferior to commercial "in the door out the door who gives a d**n if I ever see it again" production that so often occurs in the "I make enough money to cover Creative Cloud for the rest of my life" scenarios.

I'm not suggesting art is in any way inferior to commercial work. If anything it's value to society is several fold higher, and folks who invest their time in it deserve huge praise.

What I am saying is that, sadly, I doubt Adobe worry too much about it. They're in the business of developing and selling software. They don't exist to provide poor artists with a means to express themselves.

[Jim Wiseman] Somehow I think the "doesn't disappear/re-workable" part is more important to artists and historical documentarians than those doing commercial projects.

Which is why I've suggested the loyalty buy-out as a potential compromise, because I sympathize with this point. I know you may not find that ideal, but I mention this as evidence that I understand the importance of this point.

FWIW, I am emotionally involved in my work. I currently make films for an institute focusing on disability rights issues, and I feel that, while tiny, my contribution to this area is worthwhile. I currently use CS6 Production Premium, which I feel does more than enough for my current needs. Whether or not what I produce can be classed as art is an entirely different matter, and not for me to judge.

If I was to start my own business, I would certainly jump in with CC. I would hope that they offer a loyalty option, but if they didn't, I would make it a standard part of my workflow to end any project I worked on by exporting formats that make the file as transferable as possilbe (XML etc. etc.). It wouldn't be perfect, of course, and may cost be time down the road when I need to revisit projects. However, I predict that the time saved by the productivity possible with using CC will offset this loss of time later. Not to mention the relatively good value of CC compared to other potential solutions.


Return to posts index

Jim Wiseman
Re: Compromise: It's as Bad as Congress with this Issue
on Jun 4, 2013 at 5:00:29 am

Sorry if I came on too strong. Thanks for your response. I have respect for the work you are doing. BTW, I was on scholarship and being paid for a teaching assistantship in Chicago, and it didn't cost $40k at CalArts then. I feel sorry for the young people who graduate with huge student loans these days.

Didn't mean to toot my own horn, (though I guess I did) but the attitude toward the arts by many does get to me, especially the "if you can't afford $50 a month (and that is now, not after everyone has committed) you just don't deserve these pro tools". Artists have been using Adobe tools since their inception. I saw Photoshop 1.x when it was first shown, I think I was in San Francisco, and bought it as soon as it was available. Have spent a great deal on Adobe software since, although only came to Premiere at CS 5.0 Production Premium. Have upgraded annually on that through 6.0. Avid, Media 100, and FCP before. Thought I had settled on an NLE/compositing/audio solution and had it budgeted for a lot of future work. And then this. For the probably 100,000th time it has been said on the internet, I wish they would come up with a plan that would allow for full access to our work in the future with perpetual or buyout that isn't also a money grab. It is a d**n shame.

Jim Wiseman
Sony PMW-EX1,Pana AJ-D810 DVCPro, DVX-100, Nikon D7000, Final Cut Studio 2 and 3, Media 100 Suite 2.1.3, Premiere Pro 5.5 and 6.0, AJA ioHD, AJA Kona LHi, Avid MC, Hexacore MacPro 3.33 Ghz 24Gb RAM GTX-285 120GB SSD, Macbook Pro 17" 2011 2.2 Ghz Quadcore i7 8Gb SSD, G5 Quadcore PCIe


Return to posts index

Tim Dowse
Re: Compromise: It's as Bad as Congress with this Issue
on Jun 4, 2013 at 3:46:29 pm

[Jim Wiseman] I feel sorry for the young people who graduate with huge student loans these days.

I couldn't agree with you more!!

[Jim Wiseman] Thought I had settled on an NLE/compositing/audio solution... And then this.

I had also settled on a solution (migrated to CS5 Premiere, like you), and have been happier and happier with subsequent releases. And as you can tell, I still think it's a viable option for the future with the CC model.

But I understand why other folks don't, which is why I keep harping on about the loyalty scheme as a way to ameliorate things. It might not please everyone, but it'll go a long way (I think). My reasons are quite selfish - I have invested a lot of time and effort becoming proficient in Adobe products, and I want those skills to remain relevant and transferable when I next move to a new job. They will only remain relevant if Adobe retain/grow their market position. So it's in my interest for Adobe products to remain attractive.

I do think the best we can hope for is a compromise though. I don't think they'll ever go back to old fashioned perpetual licensing. They obviously feel the subscription model is the best for their business, and so they'll do the minimum they can, if they do anything at all, to satisfy the majority of the skeptics. And that has to centre around files remaining accessible after subscription ends.


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Compromise: It's as Bad as Congress with this Issue
on Jun 3, 2013 at 10:07:51 pm

[Tim Dowse] "If money isn't your main concern, you don't need tools that massively improve productivity. You can be satisfied with tools that are much cheaper, but still allow you to produce art at a slightly slower pace."

completely - I fundamentally accept Adobe's price argument - particularly if the response gets a bit symbiotic outside of Sarbenes etc. I'm coming off Production premium - my annual costs are currently doubling relative to upgrade from that suite.

I have no issue with that - the dollar call is fine, and I've watched quite a few hours on muse - I can remove my web designer for my portfolio. With very little effort. I started out in quark - it's modified DTP.

the issue is the core one you have related to - they absolutely have to throw a trust bone into the future to calm the user base down - god knows I've quoted you on it - five year loyalty archive - it feels nearly risk free for them (unless their goal is true SaaS, in which case they have a mid-term goal of software itself offsite)

and seriously Tim - I'm not sure that SaaS eventuality is not on a bullet point somewhere - but, for me - your five year loyalty archive cements subscription, completely secures adobe's cash flow - rainbows everywhere -

serious to god - it just has to be a good idea right?

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


Return to posts index

Jim Wiseman
Re: Compromise: It's as Bad as Congress with this Issue
on May 31, 2013 at 8:47:36 pm

No problem. I have my commercial documentary and commercial/non-commecial art projects. But at some point monthly is not going to work. There are tens of thousands of people in this boat, perhaps 100's of thousands, eventually everyone will be.

However, from what I have heard, CS6 will only be guaranteed compatibility through one sHystem software release. Jeremy says it will get compatibility updates and bug fixes, but if the OS is only the next release, OS 10.9 will be it. Correct me if I am wrong. How can it be called compatible if it ceases to work on new system software? The OS will EOL CS6 unless you maintain older computers, (which is what I will do). Throwing the CS6 bone is no panacea. Only the option for perpetual or a reasonable buyout when rental makes no sense for you would be acceptable. Someday people will realize that rental makes no sense for all of us. Unless you are only in it for the short term money. Not the case for me.

Jim Wiseman
Sony PMW-EX1,Pana AJ-D810 DVCPro, DVX-100, Nikon D7000, Final Cut Studio 2 and 3, Media 100 Suite 2.1.3, Premiere Pro 5.5 and 6.0, AJA ioHD, AJA Kona LHi, Avid MC, Hexacore MacPro 3.33 Ghz 24Gb RAM GTX-285 120GB SSD, Macbook Pro 17" 2011 2.2 Ghz Quadcore i7 8Gb SSD, G5 Quadcore PCIe


Return to posts index

Clint Wardlow
Re: Compromise: It's as Bad as Congress with this Issue
on May 31, 2013 at 9:16:36 pm

[Tim Dowse] "That said, as I mentioned earlier, I think people who are earning sporadic income are served well by the subs model, for the reason I stated earlier."

Sometimes yes, and sometimes no. It depends on the project. If it is something that is cranked out quickly, such as a projection for an installation. Then yes, rent as you need works.

However, if it is a long form or even complex short piece that requires lots of tweaking in post over a long period, then no.

In the creative field, what makes a professional is not always so cut and dried. If getting paid is the indicator, then a guy like Van Gogh was an amateur. If making your living is the requirement, then 90% of published novelists don't fit the bill.

Frankly, I think one of the big reasons for Adobe's success was its relative accessibility to the "non-professional" market. It was software a LOT of people used.

In the long run, though subscription only may be a big money maker, I think ceding that broad user base will hurt Adobe. As students, educators, and beginning users seek and learn alternative cheaper software (particularly in photography and graphics), in the coming years as these folks rise in their professions they will feel less reliant on Adobe products IMHO.


Return to posts index

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