jaykumarr: I am not able to see this live video.. will it be of great quality when i try after payment?
When you buy one of their classes, it is available as an HD stream or a download of video files. The HD stream will look good if you have a good connection, but if your Internet connection is not good for streaming, you can download the files themselves and play them locally or on other devices.
I thought the class was pretty good but not sure if it was worth the $49 (I watched for free). The second half was mostly student critique and then replays of old Art Wolfe TV episodes.
The first half was a pretty good and rather inspirational tour of Art's bodies of work and way of seeing. But if you are looking for a serious nature workshop with step by step photo geek technicalities, this is not it.
There sure are a lot of posts making fun of this as if we were talking in 1900 about the ridiculous disadvantages of automobiles compared to horses.
If you abstract this out and move it 10 years into the future, when drones are significantly cheaper, quieter, and safer, with much longer battery life, why wouldn't you use this? You gleefully use automatically synced multiple flash systems, letting a computer coordinate the flash exposures. It is a major point the Nikonists used to flog to try and prove they were better than Canon, before Canon improved their automation. Why not automate the lighting positions too? Who wouldn't want to plan a shooting day where you program the setups your lights will automatically move into for each shot?
There's nothing wrong with the concept itself. If someone created this as automated motorized wheeled light stands where you could program their heights and positions over time with an app, half the people on the thread would buy that right away.
marc petzold: At first, it sounds nice, but after thinking a second about it...i'd say, the use into a studio is limited...the model could be distracted by the flying drone....the noise...then there we have the limited flight time (usually 8 to 15 mins), then there is the limited weight the drone could lift, and depending how powerful the flashlight/strobe is...well, it sounds yet as a toy project, but is research at the world-famous MIT...so perhaps in a couple years it might become reality...
The noise? In some studios any drone noise would be drowned out by the huge fans used to blow the model's hair around.
Kodachrome200: i love my 9.99 subscription. Ive pretty much always had to pay this much for photoshop and lightroom to be up to date. and the new mobile features are great. and photoshop now runs on my mac and pc with the same subscirption
MichaelStringer - you are correct. I was thinking of Photoshop licensing by mistake. Still, that doesn't affect my point: There are benefits to the subscription and if someone wants those, they may decide CC is worth it.
There are photographers who just want to take pictures and see them on one computer. They should not get the cloud.
There are other photographers who live in the 2014 multi-device high--sharing world, for them CC might be worth it.
ssh33: I refuse to use anything "cloud" out of principle. The files I pay for or create are going to live on my hard drives or my colocated servers.
"Why would anybody privately and on purpose give his data to someone he/she doesn't know is beyond me."
If your retirement funds, stock investments, etc. are entrusted to a company with a web site that you access and manage online, or if you store your photos on ANY web site not owned by you with a CDN with overseas nodes, then the concept isn't actually beyond you. I don't like the cloud either, but I'm just sayin'...
No, that's not what he's saying, since the non-subscription Lightroom doesn't have mobile sync and is only licensed for Mac or PC only, not both. He's saying he likes thoese additional features CC has the non-CC doesn't.
wetracy: Nothing more than glorification of war and war machines.
I have been opposed to just about every US war in the last 60 years. But without our armed forces, you wouldn't have much left to glorify at all.
stevens37y: What about using a tripod?
There should be a way to automatically downvote posts that either didn't comprehend the article or didn't read the comment from the manufacturer further down.
If the thread was read, the complementary comment would be "Why don't you use a tripod as a walking stick?"
On the bright side, one set of DPReview forum holy wars has just evaporated. Now if only Canon or Nikon would stop making cameras, or if Apple would stop making computers!
Stewart McKInlay: As there is no mention of the new Photos for OSX being able to manipulate photos like Aperture we can only assume a dumbing down as suggested is happening. Most of us who enjoyed Aperture will feel sorely let down. But as usual Apple will expect loyalty from us!
"iPhoto and even Preview can manipulate RAW files."
In this discussion that's kind of like bringing up a Kia as a replacement car when one is used to driving a Ferrari, on the grounds that the Kia has four wheels and carries people.
Sandler Photography: Where can we download the (non release-candidate) Adobe Camera Raw 8.5?I can only seem to find the link to the DNG converter or the RC.
If you are able to first download ACR on a computer that does have Internet access, all it installs is just one plug-in file. You can copy that to the machine without Internet access.
Prognathous: The only thing you need to know: the $10 photography bundle is a trap.
Quote from Adobe's membership contract:
"The price of your one-year commitment (as reflected in the monthly installment amounts) may change for your next annual renewal, and we’ll provide you notice of a change by email"
In short, nothing but a teaser price. Get ready to pay through the nose as soon as you've created enough project files and can't properly open them by anything else. Good luck being Adobe's hostage.
It's strange that you call it a teaser price when they ended the actual intro period by making the offer permanent, instead of increasing it. They did the opposite of what you said they'd do.
Joe Mayer: I must be a dino. I have no interest in manipulating any images on my i-anything. I don't see the point in using Photoshop AND Lightroom. LR is simply PS-lite and if you have PS, the "free" LR is of no use unless you really have poor cataloging skills and need a program to keep track of your stuff. As for the new features of PS, well, Adobe has always introduced new touch-feely stuff to attract people to update. In this case, they are giving it to those subscribed and are trying to tempt the hold-outs. I don't need to blur my photos and selecting according to sharpness is something I don't get. If I have a shot with great bokeh, I want to select the sharp part? Most people want to select the model so they can create fake bokeh. I'm sure there's a use for it but I can't figure any for my use so for those who can, enjoy. The only use I've seen for sharp masking is in the selection of a group of photos where you can immediately see which ones nailed focus.
If you think Lightroom is Photoshop Lite, you have no idea what Lightroom is about.
There are lots of pros who know Photoshop inside and out, but have talked about how they spend most of their time in Lightroom now. Because Lightroom is a better, faster way to do a lot of things Photoshop does. Doesn't replace Photoshop. It's like owning an efficient commuter car and a big pickup truck, they both have four wheels but are for different purposes and both deserve to exist.
Photo Pete: If the Adobe business model is successful how long will it be before Apple and Microsoft go the same way with their operating systems?
How robust are Adobe? Even the largest companies can fold (remember Kodak?). If Adobe fail as a company what will happen to your ability to use the software after the first failed attempt to log into the Adobe servers? What will happen to your 20Gb of Cloud storage?
Why should a hobbyist have to pay to have the latest features they don't need and why would a professional place their work entirely in the hands of another company over which they have no control?
The business model stinks and the more people that refuse to engage with it the better. Low price offers are a good sign. It is an indication that insufficient users are renting to make the scheme profitable enough.
Microsoft already answered that question. You can subscribe to Office 365 already. The difference is that Microsoft still offers a choice of a non-subscription download of its apps.
rdscibilia: The iPhone needs more megapixels, although it appears Apple is not going in this direction. A quality eight-megapixel image is fine, but you need some space for cropping.
If you want to print an 8x10 image at 300dpi you only need 7.2 megapixels. So there is already space for cropping.
Next question: How many people still print 8x10 images?
In the reality of most people, the iPhone already gives them more megapixels than they will use 95% of the time. The iPhone already has twice as many megapixels as you need to fill a Retina MacBook Pro full screen!
For people who mostly post to social media, most of the current megapixels in an iPhone are dead weight that takes up valuable space on your phone and in your backups.
Decoboy: So how do I get 8.5 ACR for my Lightroom 5.4? Weren't we told that LR would still be free-standing, i.e. not tied to CC?
I downloaded 8.5 but it says it is not applicable for me?
It's only a Release Candidate for testing. There is no final version of this for either Photoshop or Lightroom. If they keep them in sync as usual, we will all get a Lightroom 5.5 (I assume) when the final ACR 8.5 comes out.
peevee1: Did they all sign a model release? If no, the pictures are not photographer's, are they?
In the United States the law says you are wrong. Any creative work is copyrighted to the creator - not the subject - unless a contract has been signed to say otherwise.
Tim Streater: This is a rubbish approach to a non-problem. At least it should be a non-problem; all the commands should be on menus, with the shortcut listed there. Then you can learn as few or as many as you feel like.
Obviously Adobe programmers think any sort of GUI is a waste of time. In fact, for editing stuff we don't even need any sort of computer at all. A bar magnet and a magnifying glass to modify bits directly on the disk is all that's required.
It's a non-problem. The shortcuts are already on the menus and tools for anyone who makes the slightest effort to look. Charts like this are for people who aren't looking closely enough at what they already have, kind of like when someone buys a $100 plug-in instead of learning how to use curves and masks for free.
The main reason the chart doesn't help is the main reason the menu shortcuts don't help: Neither is organized by user goal. But the keyboard shortcut table in the online help file is already organizes properly to solve that problem. (Yes, I know...nobody knows that exists)
Usernamefail: What I want in Photoshop (and Illustrator and Indesign) is a reverse lookup table that tells me what I just did when I accidentally get a shortcut wrong and weird stuff happens. :(
In Photoshop or Lightroom you can look at the History panel and it will tell you what just happened and you can backtrack out of the weird stuff.
Danny: Try to make keyboard shortcuts with a large Wacom tablet in front of you.
Whether you meant to or not, you just gave everybody a very good tip, actually.
The big Wacom tablets have shortcut buttons you can map your favorite keyboard shortcuts to. Because of this, for certain kinds of work you can single-button your top keyboard shortcuts while you're painting, without a keyboard even connected!