Sell Adobe - This Will be a Nasty Divorce

It was a marriage made in heaven.  I purchased Photoshop shortly after switching to digital photography.  I had never paid so much for software before but Adobe had a winner.  About once a year, Adobe would release a new version with marvelous new features.  I willingly upgraded each time up to Photoshop 7.

Adobe never released Photoshop 8.  They announced Photoshop CS instead.  They started breaking the software into modules that interacted with each other.  They split Photoshop into two versions - the extended version was more expensive.  It sounded great in their press releases but it made my workflow more complicated.  Instead of working for me the software started working against me.  Since couldn't move to the extended version as an upgrade, Photoshop CS was a watered down version of Photoshop.

About the time of Photoshop CS2, things got worse.  Adobe announced a new file format - DNG.  They said that the time would come when they would no longer support older versions of file formats.  They provided a DNG converter free of charge.  Once we had modified our files to their format, we would always be able to work with them.  They were doing this as a favor.  Adobe also provided Camera Raw and soon you had to buy the most recent version of Photoshop if you wanted to be able to use the latest camera models.  They effectively cut out the past and future for those who didn't upgrade.

I did like one of the new modules that Adobe developed - Lightroom.  I started using it with Lightroom 2.  I found that I needed to use Photoshop less as I started using Lightroom more.  I liked Lightroom so much that I decided not to purchase Photoshop CS5.  Adobe had only made minor changes and I didn't have a new camera.  This strategy worked for almost a year.  About the time I was expecting Photoshop CS6 to be released, Adobe announced that only users of CS5 would be able to upgrade.  They offered a small discount for Photoshop CS5.  I purchased the Photoshop CS5 upgrade before their deadline.  The extortion had worked for Adobe and their profits went up. 

Photoshop CS6 didn't have any new features that I was excited about, but I had learned my lesson.  I went to Amazon to purchase it and found out that it wasn't there.  Adobe now was only selling it through their own site.  They didn't even want to provide a CD with the purchase. 

Photoshop CC was announced in June.  I had learned that when Adobe changes the name, bad things happened but I wasn't prepared for this one.  Adobe had another new rule.  They wanted me to pay a monthly fee to use photoshop whether they had improved it or not.  They were also now selling space on the "cloud" so that I could start paying a monthly charge for my files as well.  This was the breaking point for me.  I decided to continue to use Lightroom and my Photoshop CS6 would have to do until I absolutely needed to move to something new.

Apparently many others felt the same way, and Adobe offered a "deal".  I could subscribe for 10 dollars a month and would receive Photoshop CC as well as Lightroom if I was a current user of CS6 and met a deadline date.  This deal is good as long as I maintain my subscription although the fine print doesn't say  exactly the same thing that Adobe is promising.  I need to trust them. 

I swallowed my pride and signed up.  Adobe promptly allowed hackers to download all of their credit card subscribers information. 

Apparently Adobe isn't telling its stockholders the same thing that its telling its users.  Today I read:
"The quicker transition to subscriptions has a shorter-term downside: because customers pay smaller fees steadily over a long period of time instead of a large sum at the beginning of a purchase, revenues drop when the subscriptions begin. That's true of  Adobe, and it's complicated by the fact that it offered promotions to encourage people to make the change.
For example, earlier Creative Suite customers can spend $30 a month instead of $50 for    their first year for the full CC subscription to all Adobe's software, and the company also has a limited-term $10-per-month Photoshop Photography Program option that gives   access to Photoshop, Lightroom, cloud storage, and access to the Behance professional network. "

Adobe is telling its stockholders that everyone loves the new model and to expect massive increases in profit in future years.  

Adobe should tell its stockholders that it is out of ideas and now needs to rely on extortion and vague promises to maintain its user base.  It has become a commodity - a monthly bill like a leased car.  Nearly everyone who wants Photoshop has it.  The only way to increase prices is to charge more or to offer something better.  Adobe is looking at strike 3 with many of its most loyal users - including myself.    If someone else starts to market a similar product, I'm ready to leave.   If you own Adobe stock, I wouldn't count on Photoshop to increase future profits.  The band may be playing but the ship is going down.

Orioles and Oranges

Winter doesn't want to quit this year.  An overnight storm left 3 1/2 inches of snow on May 2.  I was surprised to see a Baltimore Oriole on my deck by the feeders.  I took out an orange and he immediately returned to eat.

I put my camera on the kitchen table and took photos through the window several times during the day.  When I downloaded the shots, I had over 100 images of Orioles and oranges.  Most of them looked fine individually, but they were more than a bit redundant in a group.  I needed to select the best without wasting a lot of time.

I put BreezeBrowser Pro in slide show mode.  I ranked the entire group with a number 1 to toss and a number 4 to keep.  Birds that weren't sharp or had their butt facing the camera received ones.  I sorted by ranking and put all the number ones in the cull group. About 1/2 of the original group remained - about 50.

I utilized the compare feature in Breezebrowser Pro next.  I selected images 4 at t time.  I picked the strongest image in each group and tagged it.  I paid particular emphasis on the sharpness of the oriole's eye.  I moved all the untagged images into a separate directory.  About 12 tagged images remained.

I used Breezebrowser to look at the entire group of remaining shots as thumbnails.  When viewed this small several shots looked like exact duplicates of each other.  I selected the duplicates and used slideshow mode to view them in full screen size.  None of the images was an exact duplicate when viewed full size.  I let the slide show loop until I determined the best image off the group.  I kept the best image and removed the rest.  About 6 images remained.

Lightroom could be used for these steps instead of Breezebrowser if you have plenty of patience.  I don't.  I loaded the remaining 6 images into Lightroom to adjust cropping, exposure and color. I deleted any image was not satisfactory in Lightroom,   The shot above was one of the 6 images.

Some would call this process "Spray and Pray".  I disagree.  Every shot that I took was the best pose and sharpness that I could manage at the time.  When is all said on done, it doesn't matter how many shots I took or how much trouble I had getting the shot.  The final image is all that matters.  You either like it or you don't.

Garbage In Gold Out

 

I'm sure that Google knows more about choices I'm about to make than I do.  It certainly knows what I'm thinking.  I'm always amazed when I google an original  spur of the moment idea and find that google knows the question before I finish entering it.

The old expression was Garbage in - Garbage out.  Google has proven that if you put enough garbage in, gold will come out.  Data mining allows google to match users to advertisements better than any other media.

I add images to Lightroom on a regular basis throughout the year.  They are organized sequentially by time.  I try to minimize Lightroom entries by culling as much junk and duplicates as possible before I use Lightroom.  As a result, the images in Lightroom are a subset of the total number of images I shoot.  I might shoot 500 images at Fontenelle Forest and put 50 in Lightroom.  Later that day, I may shoot 50 images of my granddaughter and put 50 in Lightroom. I try to enter more gold than garbage.

The metadata in my light room photos can be mined.  It can tell me things about my habits that differ from how I believe I work.  This information can help me make decisions.  I may want to purchase Canon' s new 200-400mm lens.  My lightroom metadata tells me that I use 24mm - 70mm much more often than 200mm - 400mm.  It would be prudent to make sure I have good glass in that range before I buy something more exotic. 

Now that 2012 is nearly over, I looked at the metadata for the year in Lightroom 

I took photographs that ended up in Lightroom on 122 different days.

I took over 18000 images that ended up in Lightroom.

 I used full frame for 82 percent of my photos.  3/4 of the full frame photos were with my new 5D Mark III. 

I preferred my 24mm zoom.  I took 37% of the shots with the 24-70mm f 2.8 lens  I took 20% more of the shots with the 24-105mm f4 lens.

My 24mm was my favorite focal length  - 13% of the images. 70mm was second - 11%. 35mm was third - 10%.  1120mm (800mm + 1.4 extender) was fourth - 10%.

My favorite shutter speed was 1/200 followed by 1/160 and by 1/100

My favorite aperture was f2.8 closely followed by f4.  12% of my images used an aperture larger than f2.8

I used flash 16% of the time

I used ISO 400 the most,  followed by ISO 200 and ISO 100.

I shot nearly everything in RAW. 

I used video on 35 different days.

Now that I know this information about my habits, I can use it to my advantage.

1.   I now know that I can triple the number of day I use my camera.  I'm missing many opportunities.

2.   I would like to cull my images more in 2013.  18,000 in 2012 resulted in too much overhead and not enough gold.

3.  I definitely prefer full frame.  I should keep this in mind if I decide to buy another camera.

4.  I take over 1/2 my photos using a zoom in the 24mm -70mm - 105mm range.  If Canon brings out a 24-70 f2.8 lens with IS, I should consider it.

5.  I like to use zooms for everyday things.  I turn to primes when I need extra speed.  12% of my images were under f2.8.  If I buy another Prime lens, it should be fast.

6.  I only used flash 16% of the time.  If Canon makes a camera with a better high ISO, I should consider that.  I should make sure I have flash available when it will improve the image.

7.  I used video 1/4 of the times I used the camera.  Video needs to be more than an afterthought in 2013.