Let's face it V13 is just a point upgrade.


deusx wrote on 4/21/2014, 10:50 PM
Let's not get caught up on technicalities. I know I don't OWN software I use, but just like the Autodesk example I gave you I do have the right to keep using it even if I stop paying yearly maintenance which is all I'm asking for.

As for Adobe ( or any other company ) dying tomorrow. How exactly would this affect anybody other than people working for them.
I'm still on CS5. I can keep using it. Autodesk killed Softimage. I can probably still do anything I want to do with it for the next 10 years, at least.

Like I said $50 a month is not that much, it's not about that. It could be $500 a month in a couple of years. Before you laugh it off let's go to Softimage again. I bought it when price came down from $7000 to $3000 and $500 ( slightly crippled version ), then Autodesk bought it and the only version you could buy was $3000+.
Nuke, Houdini and those flammable apps from Autodesk all go from $5000 to above $10000.

Adobe decided subscription only is the way to go. What if one day they decide they can only stay alive if they decide to charge $500 a month. After all they are letting you use a dozen programs, seems reasonable right? That's only $6000 a year. People pay $1000+ a year to use just one ( or two ) of these other programs from Autodesk, Foundry, etc.....
Cliff Etzel wrote on 4/21/2014, 11:39 PM
deusx makes a rational and valid point.

I was sitting on the fence again about using Vegas Pro but in all honesty, it's not comparable to the Adobe Apps I use. I forced myself to learn how to use PPro CS6, Audition CS6 for video work and now that I try to use Vegas, I see how crude many of the tools are compared to Adobe's offerings. I chose not to upgrade to Adobe's subscription based software and CS6 does what I need it to do. Vegas has only added more fluff than substance and I'm somewhat disappointed that once again, SCS was more concerned about adding features instead of stability.

NO app is perfect, but when I look at and speak privately with companies like MediaStorm, Walter Biscardi and numerous others, who are producing content that I specifically respect - and they flat out say Adobe is their go to set of apps, I pay attention - not out of thinking it will make me somehow more professional, but out of the simple fact that it just works. It may not have the ease of Vegas Pro, but I'd rather have stability over ease of use. No need to contend with finding a graphics card that might or might not work, no need to contend with which codecs will work better than others, etc.

I may not approve of Adobe's subscription based model (I was one of the original users Adobe's research firm consulted with who was investigating subscription based software a few years back). I told them flat out I'd stop using their software if that were the case, but it seems SONY has let it's user base down for the most part. The compromise for me is to use my CS6 apps and not go any further until I absolutely have to. Given that PPro CS6 can export all other interchange project files without issue, I'm able to know I can import into AVID, Lightworks, or Vegas at any time if need be. The same cannot be said about Vegas Pro IMO.

If I thought for a moment Vegas could reliably replace my Adobe apps, I'd use it. Reality is, I have less confidence in the software now than I did before.
tim-evans wrote on 4/21/2014, 11:41 PM
I remember when the full Maya license cost $30K. Not that long ago.

With regard to Cliff's point. He is correct. For me I am sticking with Vegas - I can't justify the outlay for the Adobe subscription - but I don't make my living with video production. If I did then I would need stability and a consistent work flow as my top priorities. With each release I keep wondering what the priorities of SCS are and who they think their customers are. Every new feature they add is so "half-baked" and not fully implemented.

I know there was a long thread about what is "Professional", but when I work with Maya - I think- "now this is a professional piece of software" - I feel that way when I work with After Effects. Something about the inconsistency of the Vegas experience and it's quirkiness stops me from feeling that way about it. It is more of a guilty pleasure.

As an example take the titler situation.

We appear to have 2 legacy titlers both of which are limited,incomplete and inconsistent. Then added to that came the Protype titler which seemed to come from a different universe and had it's own set of issues. Now if SCS had worked out the issues with Protype it could have turned into a pretty good titler but it was left as is... quirky and unpredictable and although I use it sometimes, I approach it with fear.

For Vegas 11 &12 we were given Titler 1 from NewBlue and everyone was excited - finally a proper titler.... as if it was now a fully fledged feature.... but now it is has been taken away again and will not work with Vegas 13. Instead we are offered an upgrade for $99. How in the world is that a consistent, professional approach to what should be a core feature in a NLE?
Marc S wrote on 4/22/2014, 2:08 AM
I agree, the titler situation in Vegas has been an ongoing nightmare. Everything is half baked and missing key features. I actually use Photoshop for all my still titles. I asked one of the Sony Vegas engineers at NAB if he had seen the Premiere titler and he said no which really surprised me. I highly recommended he take a look at it because that is a titler done right. AE is a whole other story—amazing the stuff comes out of that title engine.

I've been hesitant to explore the new blue titler because of the stability issues and the final render quality seemed jagged in the early days. Anyone know if render quality is up to par with other pro titlers now? Even in their demo some of the video looks interlaced, not something that inspires me to buy.
Terje wrote on 4/22/2014, 5:07 AM
>> As for Adobe ( or any other company ) dying tomorrow. How exactly would
>> this affect anybody other than people working for them.

If SCS dies tomorrow you will never ever get another update from them. If there is a bug in SCS software that you rely on for your livelihood, that's not good for you. If there is a new format that changes the name of the game you will never get support for that and you'll have to re-train on new software. That costs money, far more money than the license cost of any software you use. If you are a company, multiply these costs by the number of employees. That could end up being $millions in lost opportunity cost and training.

I thought that would be kinda obvious, but perhaps it's just me.

>> It could be $500 a month in a couple of years

Yes, and pigs might fly some time too, but that's speculation born out of a paranoia I can not relate to. I am quite confident, particularly given the success of the program, it is not going to be $500 a month in a couple of years. Adobe has a significantly larger customer base than Autodesk or IBM Tivoli for example. I used to sell software that had an entry price of $250K for a small site license and it went up to double digit millions for many companies. The software was it self significantly less complex than Photoshop is today, but that's not what decides prices. With a customer base the size of Adobe, there is no need for such prices unless people stop using that kind of software or a competitor with a significantly better offering comes along.
VideoFreq wrote on 4/22/2014, 3:08 PM
Hey, Flyingski? Very funny! Funny because it's TRUE!
VideoFreq wrote on 4/22/2014, 3:16 PM
Hey, Flyingski? Very funny! Funny because it's TRUE!
Spectralis wrote on 4/22/2014, 3:55 PM
I own CS 5 and CS 6 Suites. I can install them on 4 separate computers (2 x CS 5 & 2 x CS 6) and use them forever for just the upgrade price I paid for them. The subscription model is for one computer and ends the second you stop paying it.

I use InDesign infrequently but when I need to re-edit files I've created with it - let's say I render some better images for the book I published six months ago that is having a second print run - I always have InDesign at hand. If my subscription ran out because I couldn't afford to keep it going then I'm quite literally stuffed.

Let's face it, there are no competitors for Photoshop or After Effects apart from certain freeware. So any serious designer, new or established better keep up that PS sub or they are out of the game. Good luck with that!
Spectralis wrote on 4/22/2014, 4:13 PM
I've never seen a subscription price go down - they only seem to go up and as long as Adobe has the lions share of the market with few or no competitors then they can charge what they like.

Apart from their NLE, Adobe's other software commands near complete market domination - they can price it how they like because there is nowhere else to go. Compare that to the 3D software market where there is much more variety and competition - Lightwave, Modo, Autodesk, Cinema 4D not to mention lower down the scale such as Carrara, Poser and DAZ Studio.

The Adobe subs time bomb is just waiting to explode and there is nowhere else to run for cover. How is a lack of competition and being locked into a subscription good for the development of our profession?
set wrote on 4/22/2014, 4:26 PM
Indirectly Monopolized.