Photoshop ToS grants Adobe access to user projects for 'content moderation'
nichegamer.com
nichegamer.com
It’s an incredible piece of software that, in addition to being best in class color correction, has fully replaced Adobe in my professional video workflow (Premiere, AE, AME, etc)
https://www.blackmagicdesign.com/products/davinciresolve/fus...
I also see they have some for apple motion and final cut - but I don't do mac so they stay off my radar.
More using davinci and demanding effects that work with it, the better!
Most of the video effects I use regularly though are the built in ones in corel videostudio though - https://learn.corel.com/tutorials/applying-fx-filters/
I know there's some concern since Canva bought Affinity a couple of months ago, assuming they're going to turn the Affinity suite into a subscription product. I don't share those concerns; Affinity huge rise in popularity is because it's not a subscription like Adobe's core offering.
A one-time payment gets you Affinity Designer, Photo and Publisher for macOS, Windows and iPad.
All apps. All platforms. No subscription. €179.99 ONE-OFF PAYMENT | incl. tax
That really seems fair.
Got it installed, loaded up a few photos. Then went back to the directory to load the photos in a different program for comparison.
The photos were deleted from my hard drive!
They were loaded into Lightroom's cloud service, and without my knowledge or permission (and I was using the just-installed defaults) it had deleted those files I had touched with Lightroom and "helpfully" uploaded them.
I uninstalled Lightroom within the hour.
It was, to me, as perfect a piece of consumer software that has ever existed.
The moment CC turned up, not only was it a cut-down version in terms of features, but the file management side was gone too, and this whole cloud functionality took over. A complete workflow change.
The main benefit that I found, ok, the only benefit, was that I was able to easily create web galleries for client approval etc. Everything else was gone. Lightroom Classic came back, kind of, but the direction of travel was fixed.
It took me years and years to finally get close to that one-stop-shop workflow, using Photo Mechanic and Capture One, both of which have gone subscription-based and offering close to zero value in return.
My strategy now, I shit you not, is to never ever perform a major upgrade on this Mac and hold out until all the root SSL certificates expire with my current setup.
We used to have such stable computing environments and now everything is a cloud-connected, exposed and defenceless security shitshow.
I dedicated four hours to learning GIMP a few years ago, and many times now I've been so glad I did. There are a ton of books and courses out there for people looking to do the same. Kdenlive is another one I'm super glad I took the time to learn.
GIMP is here but I can’t quite get my head around the lack of integration with open and save dialogs, even while I recognize your reasoning. The dumbest stuff becomes the biggest obstacle sometimes.
But no matter, because said commercial software companies are finding new paradigms for shrinkflation while reaching new heights in fiction and fantasy.
I just demo'd Capture One against DxO Photolab because they were the two big ones with that feature left.
I'm not familiar with Photo Mechanic.
Yes, but Lightroom Classic is still here for years and no end in sight. So I feel like the backslash is still strong enough.
Given the fact that Adobe Cloud is absolutely unusable outside of the US, I have a strong feeling that local file support is not going anywhere soon.
9 out of 10 ransomware vendors support this strategy!
I'm not so crazy anymore
If you're looking for a Photoshop alternative to break away from the incredibly user hostile relationship with Adobe I can heartily recommend either Krita (open source) or Pixelmator (Mac only).
Pixelmator Pro is my daily driver for image related work and is incredibly snappy and surprisingly full featured for an application that costs a fraction of PS - $50.00 onetime fee.
I'm not a professional. DxO PhotoLab does looks good especially with their focus on RAW. I plan to start shooting mostly in RAW.
Do DxO plays well with macOS Photos and how does it compare to Skylum's (Neo)?
Pixelmator Pro doesn’t work on Linux (it’s macOS exclusive, afaik), but it allowed me to stop being dependent on Photoshop and look for other alternatives. Krita is quite good on Linux. I cannot compare them as I’m not an artist myself, but for my use case Krita is good enough. Since it’s FOSS you can start with that easily.
I can also recommend Pixelmator Pro, it’s been really good for what I use it for!
I stopped using such tools long back, but I wanted to keep one handy to remind me of the old days. I found Serif's Affinity[1] to be a good alternative so far. I've been a customer since its beta, and I had to buy once, then an upgrade with their recent v2.0
The other good, light, quick, and easy-to-use alternative is Pixelmator Pro[2]. In the last 4-5 years, I think I have only had to pay for it twice.
Unless you want, e.g., a destructive crop[0] which they have been not adding for at least 4 years and counting. Since my graphic work generally involves cropping, that kinda rules out Pixelmator Pro for me and forces me back into the Adobe Tax Hole.
[0] There are undoubtedly many other deficiencies but this one really irks me.
Isn't this achieved by enabling the "Delete cropped pixels" option?
From Pixelmator help:
> Select "Delete cropped pixels" to permanently delete the cropped areas of an image or deselect it to crop the image nondestructively and hide the cropped areas of an image instead.
https://www.pixelmator.com/support/guide/pixelmator-pro/1010...
By the way, it's always morally correct to pirate Adobe software for personal use. Which also allows you to fully firewall it because it no longer needs to talk to the activation server.
That you know of. For all you know you could be infected and part of a botnet. Viruses don't open a big popup saying "haha you've been hacked!".
This line of thinking is extremely common and absolutely nonsensical. The point of a virus is to remain undetected.
If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?
Most malware these days does things like demand bitcoin, popup ads, or upload your files to the cloud without your consent.
If I've actually unknowingly downloaded a virus, it's honestly less malevolent than the paid version.
This is a remarkable observation on the sad state of paid software. It's so sad because it's so true.
I don't mind buying software, but I do mind pretty much all DRM implementations. Even simple license checks have bitten me in the past when I had no internet access and the software just decided that time was up and it needed to verify me. Nothing fills me with rage more than software that I paid for refusing to run while I'm camping or on a plane or somewhere else without internet, for software that doesn't need any networt functionality whatsoever to operate.
>"Google wants to know your location"
>fuck off you already know it anyway
>"Do you want to allow this app from an unknown publisher to make changes to your device? PiratedGameFromRussianTorrents.exe"
>ok
The biggest problem with piracy is the entry barrier. You need to know what sites are safe, what aren't. Also, Google hides results from torrent sites, so yeah, it's kind of an underground club. If you're a newbie you're going to get ransomware, if you know the basics it's trivial. Piracy isn't as popular as 10 years ago, but it's still there, mostly powered by poor countries.
Back before Steam, when I bought a game on disc I downloaded the no-cd crack before opening the box to install it...
You still help grow their near monopoly. Alternatives, both paid and free, lost growth. Your professional choice will still be Adobe, because that's where you spent your training effort.
I'm pretty sure Adobe prefers you pirating over leaving.
Adobe, like Apple, has a strong fambase. They don’t need material kickbacks to shill for their favorite corpos, the thrill of shouting loud-and-proud for a cause is enough.
Or with something like Reddit use ads to make money then sell api access to human content
I'm reminded of what just happened to google: this seems as effective a strategy as training an LLM on reddit shitposts.
No need to wait for Photoshop to load and it works on any computer with a browser.
I've been using Photoshop since CS2, it's incredible how far it went. Of course if it does the job you need, then that's great. I use the latest version of Photoshop to cleanup family photos, and to design video games. In both cases it would take me much longer to do the same thing in CS3. Time is quite valuable, and Photoshop is cheaper than Netflix every month.
As I am reading it, this should not affect NDA work.
"Solely for the purposes of operating or improving the Services and Software...we can access and use your data, even for marketing our Software or services."
The gall of these people...
However as the team grew and we needed seats for our talent, Creative Cloud was a small added cost worth paying.
This might be the straw that breaks the camel’s back.
But, Libraries were a game changer - especially for those who needed quick, easy access to assets generated by other artists on the team.
And generative fill in photoshop is exceptional.
Still, we’re a much smaller team now and we can absolutely transition our skills to other suites/applications.
I’ve long been an affinity customer just to encourage the development of the alternative. Time to start playing more seriously.
For photography I'm using FastRawViewer for culling and Photomator for editing.
It's also made to be used well with wacom tablets, so if you have one of those you can make use of it in xournal++.
The older "Xournal" (no ++) is mostly functional but also dead, so I would go with Xournal++.
https://blog.adobe.com/en/publish/2024/06/06/clarification-a...
Including a diff of what actually changed in the TOS.
> Use this tool to paint an ellipse. The currently selected brush is used for drawing the ellipse outline. Click and hold the left mouse button to indicate one corner of the ‘bounding rectangle’ of the ellipse, then move your mouse to the opposite corner. Krita will show a preview of the ellipse using a thin line. Release the button to draw the ellipse.
Now would be a good time for Adobe to do away with vague "catch all" language, because we now live in an era where user data is being swept up for AI model generation and governments are leaning heavily into tech companies for policing.
However to play the devil's advocate we can see how these terms have come about without rounding up to tweeter's interpretation.
Note: There is also good reasoning to believe this interpretation because using software that collects data indiscriminately would significantly impact the ability of Adobe's large customers to use their software. Since service agreements and various compliance standards forbid as such.
First up are Adobe's online terms that relate to CSAM, abiding by subpoenas, security, and feedback/bug support. Those are all pretty standard for hosted services. So while some may not like that, this is a "nothing to see here" clause.
However the "gotcha" for users comes about because a lot of Adobe's features rely on their cloud infrastructure which they may use unintentionally. This extends beyond using their cloud storage allowance or the Behance social network. Here are some examples:
- Generative AI: in & out painting will send image data to Adobe for matching.
- Farm rendering: Some apps, such as Dimension, feature off-site processing options. These of course mean that your content, textures, logos, etc are then on Adobe's servers for processing.
- Forms dissemination: Hosting forms means that Adobe will have not just your content, but also that of people that fill out the form.
- Review features: Review features are all performed through the cloud.
- Moving documents between devices: Using the app's built into tools to move a document/graphic between devices is performed via the cloud.
There are many more scenarios, but I've tried to choose a range to demonstrate variety, and how that extends beyond actions where the user is deliberately using online storage.
The next part of Adobe's terms is noting that they don't specifically call out online versus offline processing, rather they use the terms "Services" and "Products". This would appear to be explainable as Adobe's apps include algorithms that enforce certain types of document security, such as anti-counterfeiting measures, watermarking, Content Credentials and copyright embedding. The vague language of this clause is the source of the problem, as Adobe don't demarcate where and why the processing is performed.
So in summary the overly vague language can be chalked up to legal brevity, but in this era that is insufficient for peace of mind.
100%.
The thing is, I've seen in B2B sales, one business handling another's data will have to very explicitly say who will be acting as subprocessors and storage of data. You might have to disclose that you're using AWS and Snowflake to store and process data.
Maybe it's time for B2C to start doing that, too. Instead of "We may send your data to 3rd parties for processing", say WHICH 3rd parties and WHY.
> legal brevity
An exceptionally rare thing to see. "Legalese" exists because people create loopholes by exploiting the slightest ambiguity.
I invented a story of a mom telling her kid to stop jumping on the bed, and the kid says "I'm not jumping, I'm hopping!" and goes into a diatribe on the difference between jumping and hopping, the mom says "well quit it!" and leaves, only to come back later and the kid is still jumping, the mom is angry, and the kid says "I'm not jumping or hopping, I'm bouncing!" and eventually the mom has to say something like "Do not jump, hop, bounce, spring, leap, or otherwise use your feet or any other body part, nor any object, to propel yourself upwards or laterally from the bed".
And then later, the mom checks on the kid, and he has removed the mattress from the bed and is still jumping on it.
https://blog.adobe.com/en/publish/2024/06/06/clarification-a...
Interestingly the problematic language was already in the terms prior to this update.