Adobe PhotoShop going online for free - bit-tech.net Forums

WilHarris · 1st Mar 2007, 10:25

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2007/03...line_for_free/

DougEdey · 1st Mar 2007, 10:30

Are you editing adult photos there Wil?

bubsterboo · 1st Mar 2007, 10:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by DougEdey

Are you editing adult photos there Wil?

With graphics cards.

r4tch3t · 1st Mar 2007, 10:41

Nice pic there

Anyways, this would be great for my Sister who is doing design at school (High school/year 12) She wants Photoshop but can't afford it.

Having never used Photoshop I can't comment on any of its features, but would they all be in the online version? Or would the online version have most of the basic to advanced tools, but none of the expert ones?

Krikkit · 1st Mar 2007, 11:16

This is a great move - it's a nod to the fact that piracy of PS is absoultely rife amongst casual users, and recognition that, with an online version, they could at least have Google AdSense-type adverts on there, making a few dollars back. Very sensible imho.

David_Fitzy · 1st Mar 2007, 11:19

It's a way all software houses should at least consider. Maybe vista home basic free version would be a giant advertising space. For more functionality and no ads you have to pay

ralph.pickering · 1st Mar 2007, 11:30

Sensible move there. I like Photoshop, but I'd never consider spending several hundred on buying my own copy. I might possibly buy elements when there isn't a queue of other things after my cash, but I'll gladly tolerate a few ads in the mean time - maybe even click one or two just to be nice.
Thanks Adobe!

Fod · 1st Mar 2007, 11:48

this is awesome. i don't really see bandwidth being an issue at all - the photoshop interface can be downloaded to cache with code snippets being downloaded as required.

CS3 has MATLAB versions of all its filters and stuff. I wouldn't be surprised to see the web version using a reimplemented MATLAB engine.

did i mention this is utterly awesome? i am really quite excited about this.

plug_in_ross · 1st Mar 2007, 11:55

I'm definitely liking this, I'll be sure as hell using it when it comes online.

However, I can imagine the people who actually paid for it will be feeling a little pissed off.

Fod · 1st Mar 2007, 12:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by plug_in_ross

However, I can imagine the people who actually paid for it will be feeling a little pissed off.

um, not really. the people who pay for it actually _use_ the thing. the people who don't, well, they don't really know how. plus, the online version _will_ be slower. there's no getting around that fact. add in colour management, printing, mastering, etc etc, and the offline package is still worth every penny to the people who need that.

Iago · 1st Mar 2007, 12:13

Good move, but I wonder how influenced it was by the Open Source Gimp. For most home users Gimp offered just anything Photoshop did, at no cost. The only reason people still use Photoshop, is because it's trivially easy to pirate...I can't see anybody spending 300€ to erase "red eyes" from birthday pics.

It was either this, making a free, lite version, or ignoring piracy altogether, because had they enforced anti-piracy systems, people would have simply turned to Gimp or the new Vista photo editor.

Swafeman · 1st Mar 2007, 12:19

Always thought it was overpriced, and never saw this happening!

As said, might stop a bit of piracy of it, might dent their sales of it to professionals, at 600 quid a time

Dr. Strangelove · 1st Mar 2007, 12:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by DougEdey

Are you editing adult photos there Wil?

hehe I remember that review....

Anyway, cool stuff I guess we shall have to wait and see how it performs. But a very cool move indeed!

Shadowed_fury · 1st Mar 2007, 13:52

Claire returns!

Da Dego · 1st Mar 2007, 14:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by Swafeman

Always thought it was overpriced, and never saw this happening!

As said, might stop a bit of piracy of it, might dent their sales of it to professionals, at 600 quid a time

it's overpriced until you use anything else professionally for a while. I did web design for a bit, and tbh I fell in love with my pirated version that I bought the full deal.

If you're using it for business, software like this pays for itself - and this program was never marketed at your average joe wanting a couple images resized. Therefore, a slower flash-based version of the software will likely have no effect on professional usage - it just means that home users won't crack it anymore when they can get a legal, up-to-date version for free.

All in all, I think it's a wonderful idea, and almost a requirement for something that is industry de facto standard. To me it's a lot like when Alias Wavefront started offering Maya for free home use with a watermark - helps people who want to learn the skills have legal access to the program.

BioSniper · 1st Mar 2007, 14:38

hee hee, I remember that photo the first time round.. I don't think we were ever told who it was in the shot?
Anyway, that's a pretty interesting move and will be great for casual users, though hardcore are likely to still stick to purchased, run on your own machine, type software.

sinizterguy · 1st Mar 2007, 15:39

A very interesting move. And makes it useful for an average consumer.

Photographers and the like can only use it if it will work offline without the requirement to send any data to Adobe itself. But the article does imply that it can work offline.

I will wait and see how this will work.

supermonkey · 1st Mar 2007, 16:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iago

I can't see anybody spending 300€ to erase "red eyes" from birthday pics.

I understand your point, but I would like to mention that Adobe does have a limited version targeted to home users. Photoshop Elements. For the casual Joe that wants to edit the red eye out of birthday pics, and do the occasional image resize, Elements works quite well.

Plus, Elements usually comes free as bundled software with various imaging products. Off the top of my head I know that I got one with my scanner and camera. I know I must have 3 or 4 versions floating around the house.

I think this is an attempt to curb the rampant piracy of the full Photoshop. A lot of students and beginning professionals pirate the program because it's so expensive. So many media employers want experience in Photoshop, but college courses don't offer much in the way of real experience. In order to really learn the program, you have to use it, and few people can afford to drop that amount of cash.

So they pirate. They play around. They learn. Then they get that job. Of course, by that time they've been using the pirated version for so long that they never bother to pay for the real thing.

-monkey

Nath · 1st Mar 2007, 16:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iago

Good move, but I wonder how influenced it was by the Open Source Gimp. For most home users Gimp offered just anything Photoshop did, at no cost. The only reason people still use Photoshop, is because it's trivially easy to pirate...I can't see anybody spending 300€ to erase "red eyes" from birthday pics.

I honestly doubt industry-leading software was influenced by poor quality knock-off versions. The GIMP is frustrating and barely does anything, whereas Photoshop is a professional tool for image manipulation - there's just no comparison imho. Even for home users, people don't want to have to hunt for documentation just to figure out how to resize holiday snaps.

Quote:

It was either this, making a free, lite version, or ignoring piracy altogether, because had they enforced anti-piracy systems, people would have simply turned to Gimp or the new Vista photo editor.

No one would turn to the GIMP, because it honestly just isn't up to the standard of Photoshop.

I think this is a great move; it'll wipe out a lot of the casual piracy if Adobe manage to make it accessible and not frustrating to use online.

pranks7er · 1st Mar 2007, 16:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by DougEdey

Are you editing adult photos there Wil?

oh yea i rem the article with those pic ahah maybe u shud repost for the newbies

1st Mar 2007, 10:25	#1
WilHarris Just another nobody Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Oxford Posts: 2,671	Adobe PhotoShop going online for free http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2007/03...line_for_free/

1st Mar 2007, 10:30	#2
DougEdey I pwn all your storage Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Southampton Posts: 13,933	Are you editing adult photos there Wil? __________________ Burnout: Paradise Stats!XBL: DougEdey Bindi PSN ID: DougEdey Twitter

1st Mar 2007, 10:41	#4
r4tch3t hmmmm.... Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: New Zealand Posts: 2,885	Nice pic there Anyways, this would be great for my Sister who is doing design at school (High school/year 12) She wants Photoshop but can't afford it. Having never used Photoshop I can't comment on any of its features, but would they all be in the online version? Or would the online version have most of the basic to advanced tools, but none of the expert ones? __________________ Fight my Brute The quantum limit of reality might be scaled up because we're all holograms. Obviously. Once more we see that sufficiently advanced physics is indistinguishable from getting really stoned. From here

1st Mar 2007, 11:16	#5
Krikkit Don't panic! Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Lancs, UK Posts: 15,177	This is a great move - it's a nod to the fact that piracy of PS is absoultely rife amongst casual users, and recognition that, with an online version, they could at least have Google AdSense-type adverts on there, making a few dollars back. Very sensible imho. __________________ \|E8400 @ 4.4GHz\|WC: 2*120.1 GT's, MCP350, Storm G5\|4GB Dominators\|DFI LT X48-T2R\|8800GT\|74GB Raptor\|Chieftec BA01\|OCZ ModXStream 600W\|Dell 2208WFP\| The Good, The Bad, The Ugly, The LOL!!1!!1!, The Zlad!, The Kempness, The Braaaaaains...

1st Mar 2007, 11:19	#6
David_Fitzy Multimodder Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Kiwiland Posts: 197	It's a way all software houses should at least consider. Maybe vista home basic free version would be a giant advertising space. For more functionality and no ads you have to pay __________________ Duel of the Duals! Athlon XP2400+ \| Generic FX5200 \| SOYO Platinum Dragon Ultra \| 1GB Crucial Ram \| Maxtor PATA 7200 HDDs: 2x40Gb (RAID0), 2x200Gb(RAID0) \| Jeantech Phong case \| Black DVD-everything \| Black Skythe Kama-meter \| dreaded blue LED fans (didn't read the description properly) At least it's all one colour scheme now

1st Mar 2007, 11:30	#7
ralph.pickering Supermodder Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: London Posts: 321	Sensible move there. I like Photoshop, but I'd never consider spending several hundred on buying my own copy. I might possibly buy elements when there isn't a queue of other things after my cash, but I'll gladly tolerate a few ads in the mean time - maybe even click one or two just to be nice. Thanks Adobe!

1st Mar 2007, 11:48	#8
Fod what is the cheesecake? Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: London Posts: 4,904	this is awesome. i don't really see bandwidth being an issue at all - the photoshop interface can be downloaded to cache with code snippets being downloaded as required. CS3 has MATLAB versions of all its filters and stuff. I wouldn't be surprised to see the web version using a reimplemented MATLAB engine. did i mention this is utterly awesome? i am really quite excited about this. __________________ "Sesame Street is brought to you by the letters P, W, N, the number 3, and the letter D." I'm a pretentious git with a camera. ISPs want to spy on you. Join the fight against phorm XBL/PSN/Steam ID: FodT

1st Mar 2007, 11:55	#9
plug_in_ross Supermodder Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Purgatory Posts: 492	I'm definitely liking this, I'll be sure as hell using it when it comes online. However, I can imagine the people who actually paid for it will be feeling a little pissed off.

1st Mar 2007, 12:13	#11
Iago Multimodder Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Madrid Posts: 202	Good move, but I wonder how influenced it was by the Open Source Gimp. For most home users Gimp offered just anything Photoshop did, at no cost. The only reason people still use Photoshop, is because it's trivially easy to pirate...I can't see anybody spending 300€ to erase "red eyes" from birthday pics. It was either this, making a free, lite version, or ignoring piracy altogether, because had they enforced anti-piracy systems, people would have simply turned to Gimp or the new Vista photo editor. __________________ May the forces of evil become confused on the way to your house.

1st Mar 2007, 12:19	#12
Swafeman Ultramodder Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: B'ham Posts: 1,465	Always thought it was overpriced, and never saw this happening! As said, might stop a bit of piracy of it, might dent their sales of it to professionals, at 600 quid a time __________________ I am Roger, that is me0

1st Mar 2007, 13:52	#14
Shadowed_fury Natural Born Chaos Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Telford Posts: 7,134	Claire returns! __________________ Steam: kev_fury New Frag Video - Gigabyte EP43-DS3L - E8200 - XFX 4870 1GB - 4GB Kingston - - Steel Series 7.1s - Logitech G11 - Razer Diamondback 3G - 2209WA -

1st Mar 2007, 14:38	#16
BioSniper I Mod, Therefore I Own Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Somewhere in the south Posts: 3,460	hee hee, I remember that photo the first time round.. I don't think we were ever told who it was in the shot? Anyway, that's a pretty interesting move and will be great for casual users, though hardcore are likely to still stick to purchased, run on your own machine, type software. __________________ My Flickr :: Bit-tech Flickr Wii: 1792 1527 2926 7945 :: Xbox Live: BioSnipr :: PSN: Biosnipr

1st Mar 2007, 15:39	#17
sinizterguy Dark & Sinizter Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: London, UK Posts: 5,462	A very interesting move. And makes it useful for an average consumer. Photographers and the like can only use it if it will work offline without the requirement to send any data to Adobe itself. But the article does imply that it can work offline. I will wait and see how this will work. __________________ Nothing here. Go away and dont bother me.