The big news is that we won’t be able to purchase and download Photoshop anymore, except through a US $20 (for now) monthly subscription. [A full subscription to Adobe CC costs US $50/month] Dubbed Creative Cloud, the new Photoshop CC gives the impression that it resides and operates in the cloud though you really do download the program and can work offline… but Adobe checks regularly (30 days for monthly subscribers, about 99 days for annual subscribers) to see if your license is up-to-date.

Reading the “reviews” on Adobe’s site, it seems that some people do not understand that the cloud option costs the same (currently) as the purchase option. In fact, buy once and use forvever is what most non-pro PS users do since there is no need to constantly upgrade to the latest versions every 2 years. With the cloud option, you are “renting” and will never stop paying, forever upgrading for features you may never care about.

We’ve no doubt that Adobe’s bean counters and number crunchers have figured out that a subscription model will earn them more money, but there’s danger lurking. While most organizations may be able to justify a one-time purchase of Photoshop if there’s money in the budget and based on current image processing needs, it will be much more difficult to escape the ever watchful accountant’s eyes that see an expenditure line item of $240 (or more) every single year — and require justification every year. Get something cheaper or free, they might order — and you’ve just lost a subscriber and user of Photoshop.

Eventually, everything will inevitably move to the cloud, but not yet, just not quite yet. Adobe may be moving just a tad bit too early for many users. It should continue to offer two versions of Photoshop: the purchase & download version and the cloud version, with the cloud version providing more frequent features updates and enhancements. Priced at par with the purchase version (assuming a 2-year upgrade path), the cloud version may eventually convince many users that, in the long run, it is the “better value for the money” (especially for those who MUST use PS all the time).

So, what do you think Adobe, there’s still time to listen to your customers and do a discreete backpedaling after considering the various scenarios? Anticipate and fend off a potential looming crisis?

Those who are stuck on Adobe software really have no choice. Others can easily find other alternatives (and if none satisfy you today, just give it some time, they will come).

If you are a Photoshop user and are incensed about this move to a subscription model, then you can still purchase and download a stand alone version of Photoshop CS6 until Adobe removes this option for good.

Happy New Year to all our readers!

Here’s wishing you and your family a safe, prosperous and happy New Year 2013! Thank you for your support during 2012 and we hope to bring you more reviews, articles and tutorials in 2013.

Just a heads-up that at 9:30 AM today, Photoxels will go into virtual silence for approximately 5 minutes. Please join us (and millions of other web sites) to observe a moment of silence for the victims of the Sandy Hook Elementary School. Thank you.

The other day, I went to see my dentist and was I surprised when she stuck a different intra-oral device into my mouth for an x-ray! No, it was not the usual film and it did not require a few minutes of processing time. As soon as she clicked the button and I heard the familiar buzz, an image immediately appeared on the computer monitor. I was amazed, but really should not be. I should have realized that with fewer and fewer companies still manufacturing film, x-ray imaging would also go the digital route. Apparently it requires one third less radiation than for photographic film, so this is a good thing. The only two complaints I have is that this particular brand of intra-oral device felt huge so that I could not help gagging holding it immobile in my mouth and the corners were sharp and dug painfully into my gums and palate. A little research on the Internet reveals that intra-oral dental x-ray sensor is not new.

From Wikipedia:

Digital radiography in dentistry provides the clinician with the ability to store their images on a computer. This provides two key advantages over film in the form of full screen images that can be enhanced and zoomed in on, aiding diagnostics and providing easier patient communication, as well as allowing dental offices to communicate images electronically, allowing for simpler referrals and, where applicable, easier insurance claim submission.

I would suspect that if she started to take x-ray photos of everyday objects lying around her office and posted these on the Internet, she would quickly become famous. [Hint to other dentist photographers.]

Now if they could only invent a way to numb the gums without needles. I hate needles!

Panasonic Lumix DMC-G5

On July 10, 2012, Panasonic hosted editors from Canada, US and Latin America to a one-day media event in Sonoma, California. Photoxels was present for the event. Panasonic execs from Japan, US and Canada presented the new Panasonic line-up for 2012: the LUMIX SZ5, FZ200, LX7 and G5. A number of new lenses were also made available for use on the Lumix G5 interchangeable lens camera.

Continue Reading »

One thing the success of mirrorless DSLRs has accomplished is to force the manufacturers of traditional mirrored DSLRs to up their game. There are two camera introductions that we are awaiting: 1) Canon to [finally] introduce their mirrorless interchangeable lens camera, probably based on the same [smaller than APS-C] sensor used in the G1 X, and 2) Nikon to introduce an entry-level full-frame DSLR, the D600 [rumor].

Canon’s introduction will signal that the mirrorless concept is here to stay, and Canon intends to bite a big share out of it. Nikon’s introduction signals that it intends to differentiate itself from the APS-C mirrorless crowd with full-frame traditional mirrored DSLRs targeted to entry-level as well as to pro users.

The problem with both is that eventually mirrorless will also go full-frame. There are no technological barrier in doing so, Leica having already shown the way with the M9. should the [rumored] Leica mirrorless also be full-frame, expect full-frame to become the next battleground between mirrorless and traditional mirrored DSLRs. And we know who’s going to win that battle eventually, don’t we?

Pictures from sporting events can be spectacular. Most of the time, professional photographers capture those “moment in time” photos but at times, amateurs can also capture snapshots of events that pros are not there to witness. The 2012 Summer Olympics organizers cannot, it seems, give a straight answer on whether photos taken at the event can be posted on social media sites and or sold by the photographers, amateurs or pros. Photographers were angered at what seems to be a ban on posting photos that they take at the 2012 Summer Olympics onto social sites (the prohibition is printed right there on the ticket) but the organizers reversed themselves by saying that only “commercial” photography were banned. So both amateur and professional photographers cannot sell or earn any money from the pictures they take at the 2012 Olympics? Not only is this commercially crass, but it is also asinine. Imagine if companies declared that, from now on, any photos of their people, trucks, buildings, events, etc. cannot be used commercially. We simply would’t be able to report the news anymore.

Oh please, how in the world can you say such a thing — even think of it? After all, Canon DSLRs are used by professionals around the world. People make a living using one. Their cameras consistently earn awards. Movies are filmed using their DSLRs. No way. Uh-uh. Not happening.

Canon is the only major manufacturer still clinging to the traditional mirrored DSLR model. Even Nikon recognized the rising popularity — though not the inevitability — of the mirrorless DSLRs. With their 1 Series compact mirrorless, Nikon made a timid foray into the arena, staying well to the perimeter, and may not quite believe in it themselves.

But Canon, ah, Canon doggedly refuses to acknowledge the mirrorless DSLRs are a danger at all. In fact, it’s answer is the large (larger than Four Thirds, smaller than APS-C) sensor G1 X, a point-and-shoot with prosumer ambitions. If you’ve been reading the G1 X reviews we’ve linked to today and the past few days, you’re by now becoming very aware that the G1 X just does not cut it. How do you make a camera in this day and age that is so sluggish that it is good only for landscape photography? How do you justify the sticker price you slap on it so it competes with the compact mirrorless with interchangeable lenses and high resolution EVF? Someone at Canon obviously is suffering from the same “Hold the fort” mentality so prevalent at Kodak as digital gnawed away at their film business.

My money is on the table that Canon will introduce its compact mirrorless sooner than later and, if the minds that brought the EOS revolution still resides there, we may well see a mirrorless revolution at Canon too. Or maybe, we won’t.

How could London Underground mess up their sign so? No DSLR was allowed in their Aldwych Underground Station “due to their combination of high-quality sensor and high resolution” — then they backtracked and said it was for safety, since heavy cameras and tripods could pose a safety hazard as visitors negotiated spiral staircase with over 160 steps; and again now a third time saying that excessive photography (apparently people using DSLRs tend to take excessive pictures) would cause delays because people were held up by visitors taking pictures. So, which one of the three reasons is it? And if any one of those was deemed valid, why remove the ban now?

Let’s examine the 3 reasons given one by one.

1. Compact mirrorless cameras now take high quality and high resolution pictures, so banning DSLRs won’t help one bit.
2. Put a sign that says no one is supposed to take pictures on the staircase. No one is stupid enough to anyway.
3. I believe advanced photographers take less pictures than happy go-lucky snapshooters.

The reasons do not hold water and London Underground has still not come out and tell us the real reason for the original ban. Probably some company wanted to gain exclusive rights to take and sell pictures and postcards there. A perfectly good reason and one that every photographer would accept. But, please no bull.

via pdn