Photoshop: Creative Cloud: New Camera Shake Tool

[sanyasi]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Today, Adobe announced major developments in its Creative Cloud suite. I don't know if this is new, but it appears as if you will be able to obtain a single application (e.g. Photoshop) through the CC without subscribing to all the applications, which is expensive if you are just a photographer (as opposed to a graphic artist or web designer).

 

As part of the announcement, Adobe mentioned several new Photoshop tools. The most notable is the one that addresses camera shake. That was demonstrated in a video last year and although I doubt it will prove to be the cure all in ever situation, it looks like an interesting and useful tool. They also refer to being able to add RAW filters on layers, which appears to be a major development.

 

These tools will be available in mid June for Creative Suite subscribers. It is unclear when a new CD version of Photoshop will be available, so if you are interested in the latest and greatest Photoshop developments, Creative Cloud may be worth considering.

 

Photoshop effects | Adobe Photoshop CC - Features

 

Adobe Ditches Creative Suite for CC: Creative Cloud | News & Opinion | PCMag.com

[Jay B]

It's my understanding that you will never get another disk from Adobe.

If you want CS6, you'll need to buy one that is in the shops now.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[xrogers]

I've heard that PSCC will cost $10/month 1st year, and then $20/month thereafter, until they raise the price. I upgrade Photoshop every other version, so this will more than triple my cost.

 

I should be able to run another few years on CS5. By then I expect other products will have taken over the market that doesn't see enough value in the added cost of PSCC.

[Jim-St]

My own use of PS has declined gradually over the last 6 or 7 years as LR had grown into a replacement for all my digital cameras' output. I still make the round trip LR>PS to do a few things LR can't do, e.g.:

 

- Photomerge, and consequent use of content-aware fill to ptach up round the edges

 

- Merge to HDR (though with PV12 in LR4, LR's own tone-mapping capabilities are much enhanced, so fewer excursions into PS are needed)

 

- Text: still no way to put a decent caption on a print out of LR, so this requires PS)

 

- Lens Correction Filter (but the Upright tool in LR5 looks to have perspective correction nailed pretty definitively)

 

Like xrogers above, I've reduced my upgrade purchasing to alternate versions (I bought PS7, CS, CS2, CS3 and CS5), so when it comes to PSCC, I have to ask if it's going to be worth leaping in now for an introductory deal at £105 for year 1 and £210 (and rising, no doubt) in future years.

 

A quick Google around suggests that PS Elements 11 has content-aware fill and HDR merge and of course it's always had the text tool, so I think I may have come full circle (started out with PSE2 in 2002, and I think I'm more likely to buy PSE12 on disc than PS13 in the Creative Cloud...

 

So maybe it's time to say "farewell, Photoshop, it's been good to know you..."

 

I wonder how this will play out for Adobe...

[andybarton]

According to the BBC, subscriptions for just PS will cost £18 per month.

 

BBC News - Adobe starts subscription for Photoshop and Dreamweaver

 

As someone who has bitten for alternate upgrades too, I suspect that Photoshop CS6 will be my last version.

 

IMO, we have pirated copies to blame for this move by Adobe. They have to generate income somehow.

[jaapv]

Btw, I understand this cloud system has been cracked already in hacker and pirate circles...

I guess I'll stick with CS6 as well...

[aufderlauer]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The problem with keeping older CS Versions is the update of RAW-Converter for newer camera models. Sooner or later they don't upgrade to older CS, so also it will be with CS6.

I still have PS CS4, use LR 4.4 for RAW converting or alternatively PhaseOne C1.

[Guest malland]

Just to be clear, here is a quote from MacInTouch:

Adobe announced that it is "accelerating" its shift to the subscription-based Creative Cloud, giving notice that it is stopping development of the Creative Suite (currently at CS6):

 

While Adobe Creative Suite® 6 products will continue to be supported and available for purchase, the company has no plans for future releases of Creative Suite or other CS products.

So, to be able to use Photoshop 7, or whatever it will be called when it comes out, you'll have to use it through a the monthly subscription service, i.e. renting it rather than buying it. No way, I prefer to pay for something and be done with, and not to have another monthly charge on my credit card statement to check. Adobe seems to think it's Creative Suite is a "way of life". Hey, there is more to life than effing Adobe.

 

—Mitch/Paris

Paris au rythme de Basquiat and Other Poems [download link for book project]

[Jeff S]

- Text: still no way to put a decent caption on a print out of LR, so this requires PS)

 

Maybe not ideal, but not impossible, as shown here. The Identity Plate in the print module can also be used (awkwardly) for a short line.

 

I keep CS4, but use it less and less.

 

Jeff

[Jim-St]

The Identity Plate in the print module can also be used (awkwardly) for a short line.

 

Jeff

 

True enough, Jeff, but to my mind it's a bit clunky, and captioning prints really requires choice of fonts, ink colour, etc....

 

So a job for PS, or going forward maybe PSE, for the foreseeable. Likewise I suspect making cards and the like will never be doable in LR.

 

Anyway, thanks for the link

 

Jim

[Jeff S]

Likewise I suspect making cards and the like will never be doable in LR.

 

Not long ago folks said the same about many other LR features only possible through PS, e.g., soft proofing, moire removal, local temp/tint adjustments, links to publishing tools, and lots more. The advanced healing brush in LR5 beta is another step in that direction.

 

That doesn't help you now, but I caution on saying never.

 

Jeff

[Jim-St]

I caution on saying never.

 

Jeff

 

Nil desperandum, indeed! LR has certainly moved more onto the terrain of PS with localised adjustments, healing brushes and so on: these are core business for a pixel editor, whereas LR's Develop module started out really as a raw tweaker/ converter (and I seem to remember the LR team once had a motto something like "Don't do evil" suggesting it would never become a programme that could be used "to Photoshop" images).

 

And the text enhancement feature is clearly something they could fix. But the real point in today's discussions here and on most every other photo forum site, is whether a future without PS will be viable for those who shy at the cost of Creative Cloud apps. For me, PSE would seem a possible solution, though others elsewhere are hopeful Gimp may rise to the occasion. I might try the introductory offer of one year at <£9 p.m., but (a) I don't think I'd go further beyond that year, and ( I don't want to make them think I will.

 

So I'm looking seriously at PSE, and it's looking quite a strong contender nowadays

 

Jim

[Tim B]

Adobe has been increasing its stranglehold on us for ages with the requirement to upgrade PS if you want the latest ACR conversions.

 

The so called Creative Cloud is something I deeply resent, all the more so as I read of problems people are having with it. It simply isn't good value if all you want is Photoshop, especially if you are in the UK, where we get further ripped off. I tried to follow the different subscription options and the fees being asked and it seemed that it would cost way over the usual (very high) upgrade costs in the course of a year.

 

The problem is that although I am by no means a PS expert it does provide excellent tools and a workflow that I have grown used to and I don't see a good value alternative. LR is OK as far as it goes, but that isn't yet far enough for me and I do all my major editing by sending LR files to PS.

 

Over a barrel in CC (Cloud Cuckoo) land.

 

I haven't read here of many of you feeling equally strongly or have I missed a thread?

 

Tim

[andybarton]

I feel strongly about it, but Adobe have us over a barrel.

 

Unless, of course, you are content with the tools you have, such as Delta 100 and Tri-X, or an M9 or M, in which case you can just ignore what Adobe try to force you to do for a few years.

[Joe S]

 

As part of the announcement, Adobe mentioned several new Photoshop tools. The most notable is the one that addresses camera shake. That was demonstrated in a video last year and although I doubt it will prove to be the cure all in ever situation, it looks like an interesting and useful tool.

 

Adobe Ditches Creative Suite for CC: Creative Cloud | News & Opinion | PCMag.com

 

 

I'll stick with cs6 and invest the "cloud" rent money in a good tripod instead.

[adan]

I feel strongly about it, but Adobe have us over a barrel.

 

Unless, of course, you are content with the tools you have, such as Delta 100 and Tri-X, or an M9 or M, in which case you can just ignore what Adobe try to force you to do for a few years.

 

1) Not if one uses .dng - I was able to open my first M9 pictures in 09/2009 with a (then) 4-year-old G5 iMac and (then) 4-year-old version of PSCS2 and Adobe Camera Raw. Months before Adobe "supported" the M9 - simply because everything the old software needed to know (pixel count, pixel arrangement, etc.) was "written" into the .dng file itself.

 

(Yeah, the embedded color profiling was a dud - but that's why I have a Gretag card... )

 

2) So long as DNG Converter is available in (free) upgrades for new cameras, I don't have to upgrade my main software at all. D800? D600? I'm handling those with Photoshop/ACR 2009 - simply by using a more recent version of DNG Converter to read the newer cameras' NEFs, and moving their data into a "universal" backward-compatable format - called .dng.

 

3) The only reason I have ever upgraded Photoshop was primarily for compatability with newer computers and OS changes - usually about every third version (I've been using it since PS (NOT CS!) 2.5 in 1993). With the exception of adopting raw shooting for the first time (PSCS2), and even then, it was mostly because I also needed to move up to OSX (2005), and raw compatability came with that upgrade. The new features - or improved versions of the old features - were just pleasant icing on the cake. Of which I use perhaps 10%.

 

4) I don't even need further computer/OS upgrades at this point - the sole weak point in my current computer/OS is storage capacity (and I can solve that with external drives). Unless of course the CPU just blows up or some such.

 

5) I can kind of sympathize with Adobe's problem. It isn't that much different from Leica's old problem - competition from their own products sold years earlier (they don't even have to be pirated - simply functional and paid for).

 

It may even be a paradigm for ALL tech companies over the next few years - there just isn't that much "new" they can offer, that is actual useful, and not just eye candy, smoke and mirrors. I have not purchased software since 2009 (as mentioned previously, as part of a move to the Intel-CPU Mac), since what I got then (plus free updates from Apple and Adobe) does everything I need (and more), and will for the forseeable future.

 

Same - BTW - for the M9. When there is an M(320+) - 32 Mpixels or more - then we will see.

[Guest tanks]

...

 

I haven't read here of many of you feeling equally strongly or have I missed a thread?

 

Tim

 

I feel strongly as well, but on the other side. I have been using CC for a while now, and to me it is a money saver (use 4 Adobe products), not to mention that upgrades occur seamlessly rather than to deal with media.

[Jeff S]

5) I can kind of sympathize with Adobe's problem. It isn't that much different from Leica's old problem - competition from their own products sold years earlier (they don't even have to be pirated - simply functional and paid for).

 

It may even be a paradigm for ALL tech companies over the next few years - there just isn't that much "new" they can offer, that is actual useful, and not just eye candy, smoke and mirrors. I have not purchased software since 2009 (as mentioned previously, as part of a move to the Intel-CPU Mac), since what I got then (plus free updates from Apple and Adobe) does everything I need (and more), and will for the forseeable future.

 

Same - BTW - for the M9. When there is an M(320+) - 32 Mpixels or more - then we will see.

 

I had a discussion with a friend recently about the same. Where does Leica go from here with the M, which now (after a few fixes) is finally a mature, better built and more useable FF digital M with added functionality? What's left to drive sales? New features/specs, needed or not? New products? These will have to provide a balance between attracting new customers (to meet market share goals), while not cannibalizing existing sales. Adobe has similar issues with every LR improvement compared to PS.

 

Jeff

[jaapv]

).

 

So I'm looking seriously at PSE, and it's looking quite a strong contender nowadays

 

Jim

Only if you don't mind posterizing... 16 bit support is limited, to say the least. In reality it is an 8-bit program that will not provide the same quality as Photoshop CS or Lightroom, except with very simple edits.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Guest tanks]

I had a discussion with a friend recently about the same. Where does Leica go from here with the M, which now (after a few fixes) is finally a mature, better built and more useable FF digital M with added functionality? ...

 

Jeff

 

The most obvious is higher resolution, maybe to 36MP. Scrollable live-view. Higher ISO. HDMI port, built in Wifi, etc., etc.

 

I think there are plenty of things they could do to move forward.