Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 58
  1. #21
    Premium User QT Melon's Avatar


    Weasyl
    QTMelon
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Gender
    Female
    Posts
    1,478
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightpaws View Post
    Likewise, I'd rather have a knockoff copy of CS5 (or even a retail copy) and not have to use cloud muck. It's not the future because the internet can't cope with it (Which PlayStation are learning with their Now service)
    I believe this is really off topic and rather ambiguous as it remains to be seen. The service is also for more devices than just a PlayStation 4 that could no longer play PS3 and older games. Netflix would be seen as a unsustainable model if this were the case. It is still too new to tell. It is an optional service for older games, not where in the case of Adobe, if you want new product - you're forced to subscribe.

    However, using a program is completely different problem. The program itself is downloaded to your computer. You do not need ongoing internet access. Given the size of the programs it would harder to maintain. That is why the upfront download is harder for users with bandwidth caps. It simply needs to validate your program once every 30 days.

    Upfront costs and annual commitment is still expensive, but less expensive for purchasing the product retail. The offer is available for users with CS3 and higher, so this is more of an upgrade path. That means if you have CS6 and CS3 you can still keep your CS3 version if you decide to no longer use the latest software. If CS3 is still usable, then there are no worries. Many people still do not use what the newest version has to offer anyways.

    I am still not supporting the decision, but there is some information people are assuming that I do not believe to be entirely correct.

  2. #22
    Heretic! FlynnCoyote's Avatar


    Weasyl
    FlynnCoyote
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Western Sydney
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    248
    I can see how a lot of people are against this. Given how expensive the program is I don't really see a difference.
    * * *
    We'll find a reason, or else realize that we don't need one.

  3. #23
    Senior Sarukai's Avatar
    Weasyl
    Sarukai
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Glasgow, Scotland
    Posts
    171
    For what most artists would use it for, you don't really -need- Creative Cloud for your artwork. SAI is one of the best (dare I say better?) Alternatives. You can even legally get Most of CS2 for free off Adobe's Website since it is no longer designed to be supported. New tech is new, but no difference if it isn't noticeable and with new features you won't use.
    Last edited by Sarukai; 01-14-2014 at 11:38 AM.

  4. #24
    Senior Rinzy's Avatar
    Weasyl
    Rinzy
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    209
    Quote Originally Posted by Sarukai View Post
    For what most artists would use it for, you don't really -need- Creative Cloud for your artwork. SAI is one of the best (dare I say better?) Alternatives. You can even legally get Most of CS2 for free off Adobe's Website since it is no longer designed to be supported. New tech is new, but no difference if it isn't noticeable and with new features you won't use.
    SAI has its purposes, yes, but I wouldn't call it better. Many of the tools behave very strangely (even a simple hard round with opacity only behaves differently). You can't do anything in it without everyone knowing exactly what program you've used, for better or worse, and almost all of the tools feel super overly blendy. I also can't access tools such as levels and curves, which are important for me when scanning inks.

    That said, it's still my go-to program for inking, and I use it for coloring when photoshop isn't available.

    About the CS2, while you can get it, it's technically not legal to obtain without having previously owned CS2. The feature is intended for users who had previously purchased the program, but were no longer able to use it once the validation servers were pulled.

  5. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by Rinzy View Post
    About the CS2, while you can get it, it's technically not legal to obtain without having previously owned CS2. The feature is intended for users who had previously purchased the program, but were no longer able to use it once the validation servers were pulled.
    Some conspiracy theorists theorize the conspiracy that Adobe intentionally made it stupid easy to work around that (seriously all they had to do was make it request the real key and validate to start the download) so that people would download Photoshop, get used to it (as opposed to cheaper/free competitors) then if they want a newer version with the interface they understand they can either go through 'all the hoops' of pirating or 'simply' buy the real version.

    Like most conspiracies, it falls apart due to the assumption that the 'conspirators' are in fact competent enough to be doing it on purpose. Far more likely that it was some half-assed solution that was a bit too easy to abuse.

  6. #26
    Premium User QT Melon's Avatar


    Weasyl
    QTMelon
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Gender
    Female
    Posts
    1,478
    Quote Originally Posted by Rinzy View Post
    SAI has its purposes, yes, but I wouldn't call it better. Many of the tools behave very strangely (even a simple hard round with opacity only behaves differently). You can't do anything in it without everyone knowing exactly what program you've used, for better or worse, and almost all of the tools feel super overly blendy. I also can't access tools such as levels and curves, which are important for me when scanning inks.

    That said, it's still my go-to program for inking, and I use it for coloring when photoshop isn't available.

    About the CS2, while you can get it, it's technically not legal to obtain without having previously owned CS2. The feature is intended for users who had previously purchased the program, but were no longer able to use it once the validation servers were pulled.
    Sai doesn't really have jitter which is important. It just repeats the same pattern over and over. You have to make the extra effort to make brushes that are seamless or useful. Where Adobe does have better jitter, and other brush controls to help randomize a brush. That said, I do find it good for base colors and I know how to color with it. Though neither program is my go to for finalizing artwork through painting. Photoshop is also useful in later versions for selections and warping. Since KPT didn't develop some of the plugin equivalent for 64bit for Painter, I have to use Photoshop.

  7. #27
    Premium User iindigo's Avatar
    Weasyl
    N/A
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    7
    I was against this too but realized that $240 a year ($20 x 12 months) for Photoshop CC is nothing compared to what Photoshop CS6 cost ($700). Subscribed about a week ago and I'm very happy with it.
    Last edited by iindigo; 01-20-2014 at 12:55 PM.

  8. #28
    Regular Bark's Avatar
    Weasyl
    Bark
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    52
    At first I thought this was dumb and super obnoxious. But, I signed up for it a few months ago and I really love it. I feel a bit better about it overall, too, as I can actually support adobe with monthly payments instead of an upfront cost I would have previously never been able to touch. Since I'm a student I get a discount ($20 a month I think?), too. I also have access the adobe suite, which is great, because I use a lot more than just Photoshop for my classes and projects.

  9. #29
    Premium User Runefox's Avatar


    Weasyl
    Runefox
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    NL, Canada
    Posts
    481
    Quote Originally Posted by Unzipped Zebra View Post
    At first I thought this was dumb and super obnoxious. But, I signed up for it a few months ago and I really love it. I feel a bit better about it overall, too, as I can actually support adobe with monthly payments instead of an upfront cost I would have previously never been able to touch. Since I'm a student I get a discount ($20 a month I think?), too. I also have access the adobe suite, which is great, because I use a lot more than just Photoshop for my classes and projects.
    This right here is the crux of why it's not actually all that big a deal. It lowers the barrier for entry, and if you only need it in between projects if you're amateur or what have you, it's far, far easier to swallow (plus, if you're always buying the latest version anyway, it works out cheaper). You also always get the latest version with all the latest features, which is a huge bonus over buying it once. It also gives you access to the Mac and PC version simultaneously.

    The downside... You don't actually have unlimited use of the software. You can't use it while your subscription isn't active.

  10. #30
    Regular irick's Avatar
    Weasyl
    irick
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    84
    Quote Originally Posted by Onnes View Post
    There are already free and open source competitors to various Adobe products, like GIMP in comparison to Photoshop. The problem is that it's hard to develop a product in such a mannerer that is actually competitive, since no one involved is really getting paid. (Obviously, there are many exceptions, but the economics at play here sets the overall trend.)
    I would have to disagree with your reasoning here. Open source software really doesn't have a hard time being competitive, providing it is a tool that programmers use. The problem that we have is, primarily we (as in open source developers) are not usually visual artists. We have the skill necessary to write applications, and when those applications are to be used in a field we understand (like software development) we can quite easily and competitively create well crafted tools for the purpose. However, there are very few people who both have the skill necessary to make applications and the skill necessary for visual art. Because of this we typically get very little in the ways of end user patches. Not very many artists will have a problem with gimp, sit down with the source code to write a fix, then share it with the maintainer.

    I think as these tools get more wide spread though, feedback from visual artists will eventually get patches created and the applications will improve. However, it will be much slower than the improvements in say, EMACS or VI. Though who knows, maybe adobe's new models will kick that process into overdrive.

 

 

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •