Adobe post record revenue

ChrisHeathcote

ChrisHeathcote

Messages
3,724
Name
Chris
Edit My Images
Yes
Just seen this over in the news. It would be nice if they could re-invest and develop the platform and sort out the speed issues.

https://www.dpreview.com/news/89385...ecord-breaking-1-84-billion-in-revenue-for-q3

I have been one of the many who have bought into the subscription model, and I have to give Adobe credit for playing a very clever marketing game. To clarify my thoughts, Adobe have continued to develop their mobile and online platforms, and to give them credit the mobile platform works very well and the integration it has with the desktop solution is what has me now tied to them. However whilst LRM has gone from strength to strength, LR CC has barely moved on. Other than the occasion update for new models, I’m not sure what they have improved since they brought out the de-haze functions.
 
I just don't understand why anyone should pay a subscription for editing software when there is so much good free editing software available. I don't like any Adobe products they are all far two slow and cumbersome. A marvel of marketing to my mind. Well done Adobe rince every last penny out of em. Must remember to buy shares.LOL :ROFLMAO:
 
Lightroom 7 is rumoured for October... perhaps with speed increase, better multi-threading and (maybe) a good deep rewrite.
 
shapeshifter said:
I just don't understand why anyone should pay a subscription for editing software when there is so much good free editing software available. I don't like any Adobe products they are all far two slow and cumbersome. A marvel of marketing to my mind. Well done Adobe rince every last penny out of em. Must remember to buy shares.LOL :ROFLMAO:
Click to expand...

There is now, however if you are looking for a mobile solution their isn’t. What other software enables upload to one machine or mobile device, transfers the images to other devices and syncs all edits between them, all with minimal input from the user
 
I'm so pleased they're doing well financially. That means I don't have to feel guilty for not supporting them :)
 
I'm happy to pay monthly and glad they are making huge profits too - it should mean they are around for a while meaning I don't have to waste time learning anything new :D

For those of us who did actually buy their old product (not every update of course, but every few years) the CC model makes perfect sense and is cheaper overall

Every PP course I've ever looked at and attended has been on Adobe products so, for me, its daft not to be part of it. EVERY pro I know personally is also a subscriber, as is just about everyone I've ever had a chat with at club level - the winners that is, those not doing so well tend not to want to chat for some reason

So yes, it'd be nice if it was quicker, but even on my 2009 imac it still only takes a day to PP a Wedding, so alls well :)

Dave
 
shapeshifter said:
I just don't understand why anyone should pay a subscription for editing software when there is so much good free editing software available. I don't like any Adobe products they are all far two slow and cumbersome. A marvel of marketing to my mind. Well done Adobe rince every last penny out of em. Must remember to buy shares.LOL :ROFLMAO:
Click to expand...

What are they?

I used to use Rawshooter Essentials but they are no more and to be honest CS2 was better and CS5 better still but if I could move to a free raw converter with similar abilities I would. I've seen good results from Rawtherapee and years ago I did use it but in recent years I've found that I can't get it to run reliably on my pc and to be honest I always found it just about incomprehensible in use.

Is there anything else that'll allow me to open and work on raw and TIFF/JPEG's with the ease of use of CSx?
 
gramps said:
Ha, I've cancelled my subscription this month ... that'll dent their profits! :D
Click to expand...
You really have no conscience do you Roger? :D

woof woof said:
and CS5 better still
Click to expand...
I've had that for a few years and after trialing the CC ( for the month) I still see no reason to change ( up grade?)
Plus I always remain suspicious of "cloud based" programmes.

DG Phototraining said:
For those of us who did actually buy their old product
Click to expand...
Has no one "Hacked" the CC yet? Give it time :D
 
woof woof said:
What are they?

I used to use Rawshooter Essentials but they are no more and to be honest CS2 was better and CS5 better still but if I could move to a free raw converter with similar abilities I would. I've seen good results from Rawtherapee and years ago I did use it but in recent years I've found that I can't get it to run reliably on my pc and to be honest I always found it just about incomprehensible in use.

Is there anything else that'll allow me to open and work on raw and TIFF/JPEG's with the ease of use of CSx?
Click to expand...

Marvel of marketing. You find reasons to need it.

Millions of other people edit photos without using adobe and when people look at those photos they don't go "oh look at that you can tell thet wasn't edited using abobe".

Both lightroom and CS? are far two slow they are also cumbersome. I was given a free copy of lightroom it would have cost a £1000 to buy (utter madness). I dumped it after a couple of days as you only live once.

It's each to their own if you like it it's your money and their proffit. Adobe must be doing something right.

Paying for editing software! :eek:. Not me no way!
 
shapeshifter said:
Both lightroom and CS? are far two slow they are also cumbersome.
Click to expand...
I suppose a lot depends on the "Speed" of your PC / Mac / whatever.
But that also raises the point, do you also then spend a lot of money on machine to also be able to use CS/whatever?
Professional use I guess the answer is yes, keen armature, well I guess it keeps me off the streets and out of mischief :D

shapeshifter said:
lightroom
Click to expand...
I never saw the point of that, and TBH I think its the worst thing since un-sliced bread :D
I suppose that if you have 1000's of images to catalogue then it maybe useful, but as an out and out editing programme,
epic fail ( Just IMO of course )

One final point, I have tried many "other programmes" over the years and settled on / worked up to CS5,
I didn't like any of the free ones or the "lower end" paid programmes.

I guess that since I started using CS products the freebies may well have moved on a long way,
But I'm far old to start learning a new one.
I have a CS5 disc(s) no one can take that away, so I'll stick with it (y)
 
ChrisHeathcote said:
There is now, however if you are looking for a mobile solution their isn’t. What other software enables upload to one machine or mobile device, transfers the images to other devices and syncs all edits between them, all with minimal input from the user
Click to expand...

Google Photos , Apple Photos ? Albeit with simpler editors. I find these easier to work with as a cloud storage solution than Lightroom as I don't have to bother putting photos into collections to get them to sync

Apple in part helped Lightroom grow by killing of Aperture

Google could make large inroads into Lightroom if they brought back a desktop (or browser) version of Snapseed and had it all work seamlessly with their cloud service.
As it is, I'm tempted to give mobile only editing a go with Snapseed.
 
Last edited:
Eloise said:
Lightroom 7 is rumoured for October... perhaps with speed increase, better multi-threading and (maybe) a good deep rewrite.
Click to expand...


Do you have any sources for that rumour?

According to Lightroon Forum:

"Anyone who knows anything cannot say, and anyone who says anything does not know"
 
Last edited:
I don't mind spending a few pounds every month as I said on the other recent thread on adobe I think of cc as part of my photo kit

It's less than the cost of a lunch in Wetherspoons for me and the missus :D
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
What are they?

I used to use Rawshooter Essentials but they are no more and to be honest CS2 was better and CS5 better...
Click to expand...

Cobra said:
I've had that for a few years and after trialing the CC ( for the month) I still see no reason to change ( up grade?)
Plus I always remain suspicious of "cloud based" programmes.
Click to expand...

One thing CS5 doesn't have is moire remover. I have tried to download CC but it failed every time.
 
Last edited:
shapeshifter said:
Marvel of marketing. You find reasons to need it.

Millions of other people edit photos without using adobe and when people look at those photos they don't go "oh look at that you can tell thet wasn't edited using abobe".

Both lightroom and CS? are far two slow they are also cumbersome. I was given a free copy of lightroom it would have cost a £1000 to buy (utter madness). I dumped it after a couple of days as you only live once.

It's each to their own if you like it it's your money and their proffit. Adobe must be doing something right.

Paying for editing software! :eek:. Not me no way!
Click to expand...

Asking you what the free alternatives are was a genuine question but maybe you thought I was being "funny" and therefore didn't answer?

Apart from Rawshooter Essentials and Rawtherapee everything else I've tried I've rejected PDQ so if you do have any suggestions I'd be happy to know what they are and I'll look at them when I get time.

One problem I've had when typing something like "Free processing software" into Google is that the packages are often frankly awful to use or not free at all.

I have tried Lightroom but I hated it. It seemed to be more of a photo import and filing package with a photo processor hidden away in a corner than a dedicated processing package.
 
woof woof said:
Asking you what the free alternatives are was a genuine question but maybe you thought I was being "funny" and therefore didn't answer?

Apart from Rawshooter Essentials and Rawtherapee everything else I've tried I've rejected PDQ so if you do have any suggestions I'd be happy to know what they are and I'll look at them when I get time.

One problem I've had when typing something like "Free processing software" into Google is that the packages are often frankly awful to use or not free at all.

I have tried Lightroom but I hated it. It seemed to be more of a photo import and filing package with a photo processor hidden away in a corner than a dedicated processing package.
Click to expand...
Each to their own. Almost all my processing is done in Lightroom, which I find quite fast, and only rarely do I have to resort to other products. Usually for a specific effect or correction. I'm happy to pay the small monthly fee- it's a lot less than I would have paid for film, let alone developing.
 
gramps said:
…that'll dent their profits!
Click to expand...


:runaway:

I was hoping for that when I decided to go
Adobe free some years back! Didn't work. :(
 
woof woof said:
One thing CS5 doesn't have is moire remover.
Click to expand...
Having googled that, I'm not sure that is actually any use to me. One thing, unless I missed it, CC doesn't have the "fill bucket tool"
 
woof woof said:
Asking you what the free alternatives are was a genuine question but maybe you thought I was being "funny" and therefore didn't answer?

Apart from Rawshooter Essentials and Rawtherapee everything else I've tried I've rejected PDQ so if you do have any suggestions I'd be happy to know what they are and I'll look at them when I get time.

One problem I've had when typing something like "Free processing software" into Google is that the packages are often frankly awful to use or not free at all.

I have tried Lightroom but I hated it. It seemed to be more of a photo import and filing package with a photo processor hidden away in a corner than a dedicated processing package.
Click to expand...
If you want an alterantive to something that does the most (as many things as possible) then there probably is no alternative. If you make a decision based on what you need you may find you don't need PS CS?. But if you are the type of person that needs the biggest tyres on his car just in case and the biggest wide screen TV just in case then you will definitely need the latest version of CS 100 +.
What do you need or what do you want?
 
Last edited:
Ste_S said:
Google Photos , Apple Photos ? Albeit with simpler editors. I find these easier to work with as a cloud storage solution than Lightroom as I don't have to bother putting photos into collections to get them to sync

Apple in part helped Lightroom grow by killing of Aperture

Google could make large inroads into Lightroom if they brought back a desktop (or browser) version of Snapseed and had it all work seamlessly with their cloud service.
As it is, I'm tempted to give mobile only editing a go with Snapseed.
Click to expand...

However Google Photos & Apple Photos didn’t exist at first and by the time they did, many were already tied in to the lightroom workflow
 
shapeshifter said:
If you want an alterantive to something that does the most (as many things as possible) then there probably is no alternative. If you make a decision based on what you need you may find you don't need PS CS?. But if you are the type of person that needs the biggest tyres on his car just in case and the biggest wide screen TV just in case then you will definitely need the latest version of CS 100 +.
What do you need or what do you want?
Click to expand...

If you know of any good free raw and jpeg processors list them and I'll check them out.
 
The ability to import, catalogue, process, print and if required print a book in the same workflow makes Lightroom indispensable to me. Any heavier processing is done in Photoshop. The monthly cost is inconsequential in the grand scheme of things.
I tried Gimp as an alternative a few years ago and loathed every second of the experience.
 
I'm of the opinion that it's the industry standard where there really isn't a viable alternative offering a superb platform for organisation and RAW conversion. The cost is insignificant if you are relatively serious about your photography.

I don't find it slow other than 100% previews but it has such a monopoly and is distributed by a huge profitable company that you really can't see it not being the industry leading software solution for many years to come. Other than cost, why wouldn't you?
 
I really don’t get the people that are too cheap to pay for something like LR. Every hobby has costs involved. Motor sport, painting, fishing all have costs.

We’re lucky these days in that once we have the camera and lenses, the rest is free. In the days of film you’d have to buy the film, pay to have it processed and printed or if you developed yourself you have the cost of paper and chemicals. 24/36 shots per film? What did that cost?

All I can say is if your too tight to pay £10/month for processing your photos, you don’t take photography very seriously and maybe you should take up stamp collecting instead.

If you’ve found a free alternative that works for you that’s great, but don’t complain about a company that makes their money by offering some great software at a price that is peanuts in the grand scheme of thing.
 
Last edited:
ecoleman said:
I really don’t get the people that are too cheap to pay for something like LR. Every hobby has costs involved. Motor sport, painting, fishing all have costs.

We’re lucky these days in that once we have the camera and lenses, the rest is free. In the days of film you’d have to buy the film, pay to have it processed and printed or if you developed yourself you have the cost of paper and chemicals. 24/36 shots per film? What did that cost?

All I can say is if your too tight to pay £10/month for processing your photos, you don’t take photography very seriously and maybe you should take up stamp collecting instead.

If you’ve found a free alternative that works for you that’s great, but don’t complain about a company that makes their money by offering some great software at a price that is peanuts in the grand scheme of thing.
Click to expand...

I don’t have an issue with paying for CC, but it would be nice if they would re-invest some of the money back into developing the desktop program, I bought into the cc programme on the basis that all major upgrades were included ie LR 6-7. The current version has been out since 2015. I could have purchased LR6 and saved £120ish
 
ChrisHeathcote said:
I don’t have an issue with paying for CC, but it would be nice if they would re-invest some of the money back into developing the desktop program, I bought into the cc programme on the basis that all major upgrades were included ie LR 6-7. The current version has been out since 2015. I could have purchased LR6 and saved £120ish
Click to expand...

To a point I agree with you. They have however acknowledged that speed is an issue and have said they will endeavour to address this. I would prefer they fix speed issues first before adding more features that will just slow the system even more.

You also get a Photoshop for the money which is excellent.

I’ve trialled capture one a few times now (different versions). They have some excellent editing tools, library is crap and I found the speed cripplingly slow.
 
Nothing wrong with a company making money. Isn't that what every profit make company strives for.
As long as cc doesn't become extortionate per month (my £8-10 is hardly a killer), I have no problem in paying.
So many people want stuff for free or cheap these days.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top