PHOTO TOPICS

Reviews of photography techniques, equipment, software, instructional materials, and any other "topics" that are related to photography.   

Entries in Review (2)

Tuesday
May072013

Adobe Creative Cloud Cost Analysis / Review

Adobe announced that they will no longer be selling individual licenses of programs like Photoshop CS6 and Premiere Pro, instead you can either license them individually at a cost of $19.99 per month or you can license the entire Creative Cloud Suite for $49.99 per month.  Adobe Lightroom, which is very popular with photographers, will still be sold as an individual package for a $79 upgrade fee.  If you go with entire Creative Cloud Suite, Lightroom is included, but if you go for the $19.99 per month Photoshop single application option you still have to buy Lightroom upgrades.  

I did a five year cost analysis for those photographers that use Adobe Photoshop CS6 and Lightroom only (which I believe covers most photographers).  Adobe has historically released a new version of Photoshop about every 18 months at a cost of around $179.  So you are paying approximately $10 per month for Photoshop assuming you upgrade when a new version comes out.  

The old method of purchasing Photoshop would cost $600 over five years, and the new Creative Cloud pricing cost doubles that at $1,200 over five years.  This assumes that most Photographers already have a sunk cost of purchasing the software (Adobe is giving you a $10/month reduction for the first year .... bid deal?).

If you go with the entire Creative Cloud suite your cost will be $3,000 over five years.  That does include Lightroom so that would save you around $300 over that five year period.  So you will be shelling out an additional $2,100 over five years for the Photoshop/Lightroom combination.  If you need and want access to the other products in the suite this might be a good deal, but if you don't, well it is just good news for Adobe. 

The other thing that concerns me is that Adobe has no incentive to improve their software.  Before they had to give you features and functionality to justify the price of the upgrade, but that is no longer an issue because you are stuck paying the same monthly fee regardless of any new features.  

You could just stick with Photoshop CS6, but they are going to get you because the Adobe Camera Raw engine, that is the heart of Lightroom, will not be upgraded unless you go with the Creative Cloud.  So you camera raw engine in Lightroom and Photoshop will be different and you loose a lot of the synergies that you get from keeping them in sync.  

Overall, this is a big money grab by Adobe.  It first started last year when they no longer allowed you to skip an upgrade for Photoshop.  I skipped CS5 and went from CS4 to CS6 because I didn't see anything in CS5 that I really needed and save myself $179.  Can't do that anymore.  Of course it doesn't matter anymore because you have to go with the Creative Cloud.  

The old pricing model didn't provide Adobe with enough steady and growing revenue.  Wall Street likes companies with steady (annuity) and growing revenue streams, they will give them a higher PE ratio than companies that need to sell new innovation via one time license fees every few quarters to keep the revenue coming.  This was a business decision pure and simple ... there is nothing here for the customers, but a lot for the stockholders.  I would feel better about it if they would just say it and not try to make it like they are doing something for the customers, we aren't a bunch of idiots.

Judging from the VERY NEGATIVE reaction that Adobe is getting on the forums, I wonder if this will backfire and hit their revenue hard and therefore their stock price.  Time will tell if photographers will just bitch about it for a few months and then capitulate in six to twelve months and pay Adobe their monthly fee.

 

Wednesday
May112011

I sold my Nikon D7000 DSLR

I bought a Nikon D7000 DSLR Camera back in November.  I was hoping to use it for video, some home family photography, and also for some professional shoots when I wanted a lighter, smaller camera.

- I found the video capability hard to use.  The shallow DOF looks great, but it also makes it very hard to keep in focus when your subjects or you are moving.  The video autofocus system was slow and hard to use and if you used the in-camera microphone, which I did, you could hear the lens focusing in the sound track.  I went back to using my Canon S90 and IPhone 4 for video.

- It took some great photographs of my family.  But it isn't that much smaller than my Nikon D700 and I use the D700, Nikon D3, and Nikon D3S for my professional work.  These three cameras are almost identical operationaly.  The D7000 is smaller than these cameras and it just didn't feel right in my hands.  I can use the other three Nikons with my eyes closed, I had to think too much when I switched to the D7000.

- I have read some reviews that believe the D7000 is a better camera than the D700.  If your a professional photographer and are focused on picture quality, fast and accurate autofocus, and responsiveness, the D700 is a better camera.  I tried to use the D7000 a few times while on assignment.  I found the autofocus not to be as responsive in low light as the D700.  A number of times I filled the camera's buffer and I had to wait for it to clear before I could take pictures.  I don't remember the last time that happened with my D700. 

For the money, the D7000 is a great camera.  It is half the price of the D700 and is probably the best APS-C sensor DSLR camera on the market.  And of course, the D7000 does video, the D700 doesn't.  But for me, since I already had a D700 which I love, it just wasn't a fit for me.