Sandeep Sajeev
Forum Replies Created
-
SaaS makes a lot of sense for software companies. The benefits for the end user are questionable. However, if the model is not specifically tailored to the market it is being pitched to, it is unlikely to have any impact at all.
As I mentioned on the other thread, I’m in India, and piracy is a huge problem here. You are not going to make people stop pirating software when the ‘deal’ you’re offering is what it currently is – around 1000 USD annually, payable upfront per license. This is absolutely the wrong way to go about combating piracy. Price it sensibly or nothing changes.
A week after release I will be able to walk down the street and pick up a copy of the entire suite for the price of a sandwich and a coffee.
I have an anecdote for Adobe – A big design house was raided last year by the Indian Police/Anti-Piracy Branch. They found multiple copies of unlicensed software, chief among them Adobe products. What did they do? They shook down the Directors of the design house for around 1000 USD. That’s a little more than the cost of 1 Photoshop license here.
This is what Software Companies are dealing with – corruption through out the system.
For those of us who actually run our businesses legally, this new model makes no sense at all. AND the current pricing structure is not going to entice ANY of those companies/individuals pirating your software to go straight.
On a personal note, as an editor who does mainly agency driven work with a Flame/Quantel finish, I get all my design elements from other vendors. I ask them to give me everything in layers and I comp them in FCP or these days Smoke. So I have been satisfied with my Pixelmator license for more than 2 years (on the rare occasions when I’ve had to do something). And I have never had an issue with any vendor refusing to give me layer exports.
I would question however, how many of the assets I’ve received over the years have been generated on licensed Photoshop/Illustrator/AE seats.
Personally, I have had no pressing need to invest in the Creative Suite, but I was tempted to consider Premiere as an alternate to FCPX. This ridiculous new subscription model – hey pay us approximately a 1000 bucks upfront each year if you want to have access to your work ensures that that is not going to happen.
-
Dennis,
I’m based in Mumbai, India and I have to say, I’m really disappointed with Adobe’s approach to Creative Cloud here. First off, all that’s available is Creative Cloud for Teams, not the individual subscription model, and second, there is no monthly subscription model – we have to shell out upfront for an annual subscription.
You guys have been around this part of the world long enough to know that this model is not going to work. So why is this the only option on the plate?
Sandeep Sajeev.
-
But a facility manager about to make a big financial decision really should be able to contact Apple and discuss viable workflows. That would be Public Relations needed by a professional.
Totally agree. This silent approach was barely tolerable when there were actual resellers setting up systems, but now those guys have all shifted focus onto other tools as well and it’s annoying as hell.
But this is a general problem through out the NLE corps. For instance after watching the Avid NAB demo Aindreas posted in the other thread, I went across to the Avid site for info on Interplay. All that’s available is the most generic copy. If you want to know how to set it up, how much it costs, what is required etc you have to ‘Contact’ Avid.
Why? Why not have that information on the site? What is the point in showcasing a lame video with some guy from Fuse, a video that again is boiler plate and totally lacking in any specifics instead?
I was enthusiastic about Media Composer and Interplay when I got on the Avid site. But then after watching that Fuse video and the ridiculously terrible Media Composer promo video, I was just irritated.
-
Yes, very impressive.
ISIS + Interplay probably still costs the earth though. But I’m really digging the interface.
-
mmmmmmm.
You’d think they would have mentioned it. let’s call that for 8 eh?If you had to pick, you’d figure getting it playing with PPro was first order priority.
Sure, it’s very clear now what the approach is – and Adobe’s Dynamic Link methodology is really coming together nicely. If Lumetri isn’t available for AE now, then it’s definitely just a matter of time – in fact with Cloud updates coming thick and fast,you may not even have to wait until CS8 for this functionality.
So with Keylight, Mocha, Particular and C4D Lite in AE, a full fledged NLE in Premiere and a dedicated grading App in SpeedGrade – it’s all there isn’t it? And no need to switch between AJA and BMD for I/O and monitoring, as you need to if your workflow is NLE+Resolve+Smoke.
It’s a really good time to be invested in the Adobe pipeline.
-
Smoke does this too. It’s a godsend when it comes to preserving metadata across multiple users.
In fact the ability to save Node/CFX/Action setups etc and have them accessible to multiple users as well is fantastic…once you get used to working that way.
I’m assuming that SpeedGrade also works well with AE now? And that the whole Lumetri thing works within AE too?
This is going to make a dent into FCPX and Smoke sales. If Autodesk would just swallow their pride and stop crippling Smoke to protect Flame, then it still has a chance at being a viable purchase. But as things stand with this Adobe release, unless you are doing a lot of comping (and lets face it, then you should probably be using Nuke) there is no reason to shell out 3k + for Smoke when you can get everything you need in Production Premium.
-
I think that ship has sailed. Adobe has got this release spot on – they’ve addressed practically everything that was holding FCP7 editors back from making the switch.
A roadmap is just a roadmap. This release is a month away. And we’re also seeing significant improvements all across the range – AE, SpeedGrade, Audition – making this a very compelling package for those who’ve held off on investing the time and effort into learning FCPX.
Honestly if I was looking for an NLE now, I’d pick Premiere without a moments hesitation.
-
Depending on the market you’re in, one can make the argument that it might be more valuable to expand your skillset so you can handle things like keying, tracking, grading etc on the picture side and sound design/sweetening on the audio side of post.
Being able to handle these things to a high level may make you more valuable than just being able to accomplish less albeit on multiple NLE’s.
-
It looks like an FCPX offline for me with an Adobe finish if CS7 is working like I think it will.
What are you finishing on at the moment Jeremy? And have you given up on Smoke?
-
Editors are not working alone. Audio Editing, Color Correction, Special Effects, everything has issues. The days of the one guys does all is gone you have to be able to work with other people. Everyone expects perfect.
I’d disagree with this. The offline cuts that I’ve had to deliver have become increasingly sophisticated over the years – it’s no longer acceptable to just cut the story together with some basic sound design and pass it off to the VFX/Sound Guys for more elaborate work. Agency clients expect high quality sound design and quite a bit of VFX work in their offline cuts these days – everything from tracking to roto, paint, some basic set extensions etc. Color appropriate offlines are also the norm in the gigs that I get.
So I appreciate having the Logic filters built into my NLE. I like being able to search my SFX libraries within my NLE without having to open Bin after Bin and all the clicking that follows. While I’m not a big fan of the Color Board, I like the fact that I can use power windows within my NLE without a performance hit, without triggering long render times in a plugin and without duplicating layers etc.
Expectations have changed. An editor who’s still stubbornly ignoring this reality is doing his career a disservice.