An Open Letter to Adobe

  • 34
  • Problem
  • Updated 2 years ago
  • In Progress
Dear Adobe,

I have been using Photoshop since version 3 - not CS3 but original version 3. That means 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, CS, CS2, CS3, CS4, CS5, CS6, CC, CC 2014, CC2015 etc.

I have been using Lightroom since Version 1. That means 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, CC, CC2015, etc.

I have been using Adobe Acrobat forever as well.

I have come to think of the folks at Adobe as either brilliant aliens or exceptional humans - not sure which. I have always been in awe of the quality and reliability of the software products delivered by your company and have come to rely on them for my business every day.

Now, we are playing a different game. At first I thought the Adobe cloud was the best thing since sliced bread - constant updates for bug fixes, no more huge upgrade fees, no more waiting for a bug fix or new features... Wow! It seemed awesome. Before, we had to wait months for updates for bug fixes and almost 18-24 months for new versions with new features.

Now, that is history as I get updates and new features constantly - except, they introduce a whole new set of problems. With every fix of three bugs, it seems you introduce five new bugs, breaking things that worked before. Every few weeks, the features change, the display is different, a new way way to access tools (like refine edges) just shows up.

You at Adobe may think this is great but out here in the "Trying to do business" world we are tired of the constant learning curve, whether we want it or not, whether we have time for it or not, whether it works for our workflow or not, and on and on and on.

I think everyone needs to take a deep breath and rethink the "Adobe Cloud Approach". 

First of all SLOW DOWN! Do not send me an update so you can tell the world how many updates and changes you made. First, MAKE IT WORK PROPERLY!!!! Send it out for more BETA TESTING. I will wait the extra 2-3 months for an update if it WORKS when I get it. I am sure everyone would rather have slower update time-frames with fewer new bugs (e.g. Lightroom Memory Leak).

Second, stop changing the program every month! Send bug fixes once they are fully tested and working properly without introduction of new problems and wait 18-24 months for new version upgrades. Many of us teach classes in Photoshop and Lightroom and this is making our students hate Adobe. As they are trying to learn, Adobe introduces some drastic changes making it nearly impossible to learn the software (e.g. Refine edges and "Select" menu).

Anyone producing workbooks or other literature to help others use and learn your software are completely unable to keep up! Believe it or not, we are out here trying to HELP YOU. By training others to join the cloud and use your software, you are the ones benefiting from our efforts and you are strangling us, making our job impossible.

So far, I have made many entries on the blog, complained along with thousands of others about some issues (the disaster of the new Import Dialog) and it seems Adobe really does not care. Well, Adobe, you need to start caring or many of us that have been loyal customers for years and introduced hundreds of others to your software are going to be forced to look elsewhere.

Please WAKE UP!!!!! 
Photo of Joel Weisbrod

Joel Weisbrod

  • 16 Posts
  • 12 Reply Likes
  • Confused

Posted 3 years ago

  • 34
Photo of thepicchic@gmail.com

thepicchic@gmail.com

  • 1 Post
  • 4 Reply Likes
Dear Joel,
Thank you so much for your well written Open Letter to Adobe.  I couldn't agree with you more.
My long experience timeline with Adobe matches yours.  The bonus for me was an initial introduction to Photoshop by Russell Brown at a conference.  

As an impressive Adobe "Evangelist" said recently, Creative Cloud started as a product delivery method but has now become a REVENUE model.  

There never seem to be any bugs in billing me each month.  
Photo of Miguel Curto

Miguel Curto

  • 11 Posts
  • 2 Reply Likes
"Refine Edges" is a good example how some things just change for the sake of change not really improving much.

To make it worst its not working as it should, its now impossible to use it in groups as you could previously (its greyed out for groups), so you have to duplicate it, merge everything and then after the "select and mask" copy/paste the "refined" mask to the original group.
Or you turn on "Double Click Layer Mask Launches Select and Mask Workspace" in preferences...then it works.Go figure.

Its easy to figure out if you know your way around but for someone who is learning could prove to be an headache.
(Edited)
Photo of Cristen Gillespie

Cristen Gillespie

  • 1616 Posts
  • 521 Reply Likes
I feel like the odd one out in this conversation. Yes, I'll try out Affinity again (I tried it during beta, but had very limited time and it was too different to quickly come to terms with it). But that's because I always like to know my options, it's cheap enough to buy just for a few of its features if I like them, and I've tried DXO recently, so it's Affinity's turn. But I'm very reliant upon LAB mode, Channels, TK's luminosity panels, Margulis' PPW panels.  .  . Not to mention all the plug-ins that don't work with everyone else.

And frankly, nothing yet has prevented me from using PS. Even with Refine Edge, I was using it to refine the edge of masks I made elsewhere, and Select and Mask doesn't prevent me from continuing with that. The Start Screen was overwhelming me, so I turned it off, kept the Recent Files panel turned on. I keep Start on in the other apps because I don't run through several files a day. With Recent I can use the menu if I remember what recent file I want, rather than wait for the panel to populate thumbnails, or I can use the thumbnails because I can't remember exactly what the file was called. That's actually helped me save time sometimes.

I'm frustrated with the lack of response to coming up with a better way to manage my presets. They have enough examples within their own suite of apps to know what to do—AE is tied in closely with Bridge offering previews before you load a preset file, and AI/ID already have swatch groups. But Type has gotten better,  I really like working with CC Libraries, and I think adding Adobe Stock to it is a real benefit to both customers and content creators—hopefully they won't decide to kill it next year. So the Cloud has come up with something that is an advantage to having it there.

I, too, want their focus to be on working with what is already in PS. So much could use improving. I find that doubly—no triply true of AI. But I know if nothing new presents itself, many of us here might be jumping for joy at all the improvements, but half the customers will be screaming that they didn't subscribe just for "bug" fixes.  If Adobe had done it right umpteen years ago, these mere enhancements wouldn't be needed, right? That happens every single upgrade.

I guess I'm frustrated because I know PS could be much better if management would let them be, but I'm not yet to the point of frustration where I feel jumping ship would be any improvement at all. They make mistakes. Bugs do get loose. Heck, my teeny iPhone apps are constantly updating with bug fixes. You'd think any app with so few features wouldn't have so many bug fixes. But overall, I'm having a pretty good time with what I've got in PS. Guess I'm one of the lucky ones.
Photo of christoph pfaffenbichler

christoph pfaffenbichler, Champion

  • 1279 Posts
  • 192 Reply Likes
I find that doubly—no triply true of AI. 
I suspect the Illustrator team is being starved for resources, otherwise their bug fixing performance would seem really difficult to explain. 
Photo of Pedro Marques

Pedro Marques

  • 169 Posts
  • 26 Reply Likes
Idea 1:
Product managers, long-term employees, decision makers, should be visiting some of the fast growing startup companies (unicorn ones specially) to get a better idea on how to give to the user what he really needs and let him turn off any new feactures  the user don't want.There are so many useless add-ons (specially the last years) and still tons of minor bugs never solved for years!

Idea 2:
On 1 add-on released, must solve 10 small bugs requested form users (not enougth but is at least something);

Idea 3:
Give those jobs again to the developers that have built the heart of the products in the beginning and make them build things together with the new engineers.There are so much code built that was really good and that the new generations don't know how to debug correctly.
Photo of Shane Betts

Shane Betts

  • 161 Posts
  • 54 Reply Likes
It seems that Adobe might be caught between trying to win over all the smartphone photographers on one hand and servicing the pros on the other. Maybe two versions are called for?
Photo of Peter Vogel

Peter Vogel

  • 63 Posts
  • 35 Reply Likes
I agree! LR 1 was a pro program and was designed with the needs of pros in mind. At that time hardly anybody except pros did shoot raw format. That all changed over the years and Adobe saw a lucrative market for LR emerge. Of course they wanted to cash in on that group of semis and amateurs, who also were shooting raw now.
And since these people do not buy a PS version for over 1000 € or a LR version for 300 €,  the only way to get them to pay for the product was to have them lease it, because for a mere12 € a month, even a student can afford that, if they really want to work with the software. The pro, who already dished out the 1300 € is the one who would lose out, when also sihgning up for the lease program, he would pay more than double for the product.

That is also why features like maps and face recognition made it into LR. Which pro does really need those features? I don't. The book feature could be nice, but with only one choice of printer for the books,that is not very professional in my opinion. 

They are trying to satisfy the needs of two very different customers groups and it is normal, that going that way, none of the solutions will be perfect and working smooth for either group!

So yes, I agree, it would be good to have a LR pro version, that may also cost a bit more, but that works and is more bug free that what we have right now with LR version 6.6 (code name headache).
Photo of Linwood Ferguson

Linwood Ferguson

  • 29 Posts
  • 18 Reply Likes
>> it would be good to have a LR pro version, that may also cost a bit more,
>>but that works and is more bug free 

I think it highly unlikely that the "more bug free" aspect would materialize.  They would feel pressured to provide the "pro" features, but then with an even more captive, smaller audience, they would shift resources back to where they see real money -- going after new business in the mass market with new features.

The real issue is that (to some extent by design) users have no leverage to demand bug free software.  Sure -- if it was completely non-working, people leave.  But if it's just flakey and buggy but there are no real alternatives, where is our leverage? 

It's a perfect storm in some ways, partly by luck, partly by design.  Think about it: 

- Few competitors in the "covers whole workflow" space

- Adobe proprietary develop settings, so no one has (can?  IP lawsuit?) do a real migration to a competitive program

- Growing lock-in -- each year I get tens of thousands of more images processed with LR that can't migrate without TIFF (destructive) conversion. All they have to do is keep us hanging on a while, and more and more of us will never jump over that growing hurdle of growing libraries.

Until there is serious competition, Adobe will just continue to cut their development expenses devoted to bug fixes (anyone want to bet most of it, especially QA is off-shored to inexperienced low-bid staff?).  I mean -- if it was your revenue stream, what would you do? And your primary charge was "make money".  Don't kid yourself that any company has any charge otherwise.

The interesting question is how, and when, users can find a way to exert leverage.  We can hope for an innovative competitor to step up.  We could all just quit cold turkey in protest.

Sadly I do not see the latter happening, and the former... well, it seems to be taking forever. And zero progress on migration.

Hey... On1, DxO, someone... all you guys... I'll come over, just finish the products so they fill the space!  Give us a choice, then even those who stay with Adobe will benefit, as they will pay attention again.
Photo of Rory Hill

Rory Hill

  • 242 Posts
  • 36 Reply Likes
I'd say Linwood pretty well nailed it.
Photo of Joel Weisbrod

Joel Weisbrod

  • 16 Posts
  • 12 Reply Likes
Very Sad but likely true.
Photo of Joel Weisbrod

Joel Weisbrod

  • 16 Posts
  • 12 Reply Likes
A week has gone by since I posted this initially and many others of you have joined in the discussion. While it helps to know that I am not alone, we have not seen any response from Adobe.

Every person I speak to about Lightroom is struggling with the "Memory Leak" issue making the performance sluggish or dead slow. How can they not have addressed this issue?

As for the comment posted by "Jeffrey Tranberry, Chief Customer Advocate", I love the note "Unofficial Response" attached to his post. Really? When will there be some official response?

I am aware that some of the posts and comments here are a huge tangent from the basic issue. I think the bottom line I have gotten from the comments here is that everyone wants improved performance and quick bug fixes when they are major (memory leak issue).

Are we asking too much?
Photo of Jeffrey Tranberry

Jeffrey Tranberry, Sr. Product Manager, Digital Imaging

  • 15365 Posts
  • 2239 Reply Likes
Hi Joel,

My post does say "Official Response" - not seeing where you're getting "unofficial" from.

I have shared this discussion with the broader teams and been in discussions with other product managers and engineers in Digital Imaging. I'd like to schedule some time to meet with you and few others individually the week after next. (Unfortunately a family emergency came up for me this week and I'll be out next week)

Quality and cadence of features and bug fixes is something the teams care about dearly. We have a few ideas I'll share in person, and will provide a larger survey to our community in the near future.

I'll be returning July 25th and won't be able to respond again until that date. Thanks for your input and understanding.

Regards,

- Jeff
Photo of Joel Weisbrod

Joel Weisbrod

  • 16 Posts
  • 12 Reply Likes
Okay, I'd be happy to have that discussion with you. Best if we schedule a Skype some morning (early EST is best) so I have some advance notice.

Hope all is well with the family issue. Forget about this for now and solve the family issue and we can come back to this when you return.
Photo of David Converse

David Converse

  • 651 Posts
  • 200 Reply Likes
Design is not just how something looks, but how it works. Adobe is bungling things on both of those fronts.
Not only is the look of your software going downhill (the current Photoshop UI is awful!) but the steps needed to accomplish various tasks are poorly thought out. Lightroom especially has been a terrible mess. ESPECIALLY when you had examples of superior functionality (:cough:Aperture:cough:) that you ignored.
One small example. Importing photos into LR and applying metadata.

Let's say you have a standard template, prepopulated with address and copyright info. You might just change the Title and City fields if you do a photoshoot in a different city with a different client.
In Aperture, your customizable list of metadata is displayed right in the import window. To apply different metadata, you can select a different template or just type changes directly into the window. Simple.
In the LR import window, all you have displayed is the name of the current template. To apply different metadata, first you select Edit Templates from the popup.
Does that open the currently selected template for editing? Nope! Instead it gives you a new, blank "Custom" template (missing all of your canned info.) So then you have to click again to switch to your original template.
So you make your changes, and click Done. That should save your changes, right? Nope! You get a dialog box asking whether to save changes.

So you Save, and of course that newly edited template (the one you originally had selected) is selected, right? Nope! LR switches to "None."

So you have to click AGAIN to go back to the template you started with, that you just wanted to make a small change to.
And you STILL can't see what metadata will actually be applied. Only the preset title.
This is a complete and utter usability fail. A first year design intern could do better than that.
My advice is to pay Apple a few bucks to let you copy their design, since it is a lot better in every way.
The entire app is full of stupid design decisions like this. You guys should be ashamed of how badly you have mishandled this app.
I'll just mention one other example that irks me every single day- handling of two windows. Why can't both be in Grid View? Why, if the main window is in Library mode, can I use all four arrow keys to navigate the Grid View in the secondary window, but in Develop Mode I can only use right and left? And why, if I zoom, does it jump back and forth between zoom levels, AND not let me pick any level I want, AND not display or let me change preset zoom level in full screen, AND if I zoom out too far in the primary window, switch that from Loupe View to Grid View AND switch the secondary window to Loupe View?
Again, terrible usability and done much better in Aperture. Pay Apple a few more bucks to copy their zoom feature.
I could continue... for pages...
Photo of Butch_M

Butch_M

  • 314 Posts
  • 133 Reply Likes
"Quality and cadence of features and bug fixes is something the teams care about dearly."

With all due respect, Jeffrey,  those words do mean things. It's one thing to care, it's another for those words to reflect reality. Talk is cheap, results matter.

If quality is really near and dear to those responsible for the tools we purchase, why isn't that aspect apparent in the end products released for use to paying customers?

It's quite easy to offer platitudes ... it's much more difficult to actually back up those words with deeds.

For myself, I'm tired of the false presentation where I am to believe that Adobe says they care ... but the proof in the pudding reveals their words are just hollow rhetoric with no tangible results.

The old adage is true, now more than ever ... Actions speak louder than words.
Photo of Linwood Ferguson

Linwood Ferguson

  • 29 Posts
  • 18 Reply Likes
> With all due respect, Jeffrey,  those words do mean things. It's one thing
>to care, it's another for those words to reflect reality. Talk is cheap, results
>matter.

I'm perfectly willing to take those words at face value.  I spent my life in corporate I.T. management; photography is a hobby.

It's VERY common to find development teams who care deeply, and yet are powerless in the face of company management who have different agendas.  I've seen systems rushed to market to make promised deadlines that should never have gone live, with support and developers sick to see what was coming next.  I've seen systems twisted to break core design philosophy, way too late in the process, because some COO thought "it would be better if it did it this way", after having sat through a couple years of design reviews playing with his iPad up to then.  Even in badly done off shore situations, where low-bid teams are completely over their heads, I think it fair to say most care deeply and are embarrassed by the results of some CFO who forced the situation and laid off all the people who know how a product should work.

This is not about the development teams, at least not directly.  This is about corporate management and priorities, first and foremost.  Caring, dedicated teams are a necessary condition -- but they are not sufficient.  You must have a company who pays more than lip-service to quality, who caters at least as much to its existing customers as to seeking new ones, who has not only a vision of where they want to go, but some clue how to get there without leaving its followers behind.

> The old adage is true, now more than ever ... Actions speak louder than words.

And on that I think we all agree.  Honestly, we want to hear from Adobe because lack of words speaks volumes as well; but at some level we do not care what is said because there is little trust remaining, we care what we start to see you DO.
Photo of Butch_M

Butch_M

  • 314 Posts
  • 133 Reply Likes
While I have empathy that not every Adobe employee has control over how their efforts are presented to end users ... I have no sympathy when it comes to problematic execution or the resulting troublesome products reaching end users. Everyone should be expected to do their jobs to the best of their ability. Period. If their superiors aren't doing the job, there are opportunities elsewhere.

For me, photography has NOT been a hobby for over 42 years. I am a self-employed, sole proprietorship with six full time employees. This is serious business for me. Not only for myself and my family, but also several other families. 

When a situation occurs where I or my staff may fall short in expectations, my client's eyes would glaze over if I were to launch into a tirade about how tough it is in the business world and they should have lower expectations because of (insert the excuse du jour here) ...

My clients expect results. They expect to receive what they paid for. Unlike a billion dollar corporation working as pseudo monopoly, I must respond to my customers concerns ... and do so with all due diligence. For if I don't, there are a hundreds of other photographers out there who will.

Excuses and explanations of the corporate minutiae are fine entertainment and food for thought ... as I said earlier ... results matter ... the internal intricacies that Adobe employees experience are of little interest to me when the tools they sell me are substandard, problematic and cause me more effort, not less.
(Edited)
Photo of Linwood Ferguson

Linwood Ferguson

  • 29 Posts
  • 18 Reply Likes
> Everyone should be expected to do their jobs to the best of their ability.
> Period. If their superiors aren't doing the job, there are opportunities elsewhere.

I certainly agree.  I was by no means trying to excuse poor work, but when (for example, in one mess I had to clean up) the CFO hires a bunch of off-shore, low bid talent, with no experience or design expertise, the fault is in the CFO, not the caring or trying of the crew.  And indeed they were (legitimately in some ways) berated and condemned by the users for the crap they produced, with even more vitriol than you see in this thread.

But you can't turn a plumber into a heart surgeon by yelling at him, nor the reverse; either blood or sewage will flow as a result.  

Management at Adobe is to blame, regardless of who made the mistakes beneath them. They either gave poor direction, or hired inadequate talent, or likely both. Until you see a corporate wide culture shift (and frankly I suspect a change of who sits in the seats), all the rest is just smoke and mirrors.

Good intentions alone cannot fix these problems -- it takes money and willingness to spend it, and wisdom to spend it on the right talent.

Until we see executive management show up to speak, not mid-level management with no budgetary control, the smoke will get thicker and the mirrors more glaring.
Photo of Butch_M

Butch_M

  • 314 Posts
  • 133 Reply Likes
I agree, the crux of the issue is not down in the trenches where the hard work is performed.  Which is why the nature of sharing our disappointment with 'the teams' in reality is an exercise in futility.

Our disappointment should be shared with the folks who get the big bucks and the millions of dollars in stock options ... until they wake up, there is no hope for improvement.

The fault lies with those making the decisions to allow sub-par work to be released or that unfinished/poorly tested work is being released prematurely ...

Though ... wasn't one of the selling points of CC that new features and enhancements would be released "when they are ready' and not determined by a hard and fast date on a calendar?

I would have gladly waited for some new features for an update cycle or two ... or even a longer break between updates to ensure fewer problems or glitches because the update received more thorough testing. I have better things to do than constantly rolling back to a know working version.

This current track record  is abysmal and should not be tolerated by anyone involved. Whether it is the engineer crunching the code, the project manager, the CEO or we end users.

The longer we all do tolerate such low standards, the more likely the situation will never improve and become the permanent new standard.
Photo of Jaroslav Bereza

Jaroslav Bereza

  • 857 Posts
  • 210 Reply Likes
The longer we all do tolerate such low standards, the more likely the situation will never improve and become the permanent new standard.
Or competition takes the opportunity. Which has essentially been successfully done.
Photo of christoph pfaffenbichler

christoph pfaffenbichler, Champion

  • 1279 Posts
  • 192 Reply Likes
I would have gladly waited for some new features for an update cycle or two ... 
Right! Remember when the Blur Gallery was introduced – without Smart Layer capabilities? 
Photo of Paul Cotter

Paul Cotter

  • 2 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
Hopefully Adobe is reading this stream carefully ... and is listening. I'm seeing these same comments echoed in more and more articles written by photography pros and thought leaders. Everyone is saying the same thing. Fix this while you can, Adobe.  You have a large base of users who are still loyal and will continue to be loyal -- but only if you correct the path you're on. Slow down. Fix the bugs. We're not looking for updates every month. We want products we can count on.
Photo of grauenwölfe

grauenwölfe

  • 216 Posts
  • 82 Reply Likes
I'm seeing these same comments echoed in more and more articles written by photography pros and thought leaders. Everyone is saying the same thing.

Seeing and hearing it regularly as well. I know just saying that doesn't prove anything, make any kind of a case, or carry any weight. I know that daily comments from irritated, frustrated colleagues and co-workers aren't valid submissions either. So what is? There's simply no leverage for users to negotiate or comprimise with Adobe anymore other than cancelling that godd*mn CC subscription—that's it. I should start bookmarking future instances I come across and maybe share them with Adobe, if they'll even bother to listen.
Photo of Shane Betts

Shane Betts

  • 161 Posts
  • 54 Reply Likes
... So, over 30 replies, with one official reply from Adobe telling us they're listening - and will talk to us when they get back from the Bahamas. 

Most of the things we are asking to be fixed are more than achievable, if Adobe simply had the will. No doubt there are coders on staff at Adobe reading these posts and pulling their hair out, knowing they could fix the problems.

To anyone suggesting that Adobe can't afford to fix the problems or that they're stretched too thin, read this: http://cnb.cx/29JNKxH. They simply have to want to and their inaction on this is a pretty strong message that they don't want to. The world is chock-a-block with capable freelance coders who could be hired on for a few weeks or months to address the larger issues. They simply have to WANT TO.

Can anyone say "class action"? I don't know about you guys but this is severely impacting my income, with jobs taking increasingly longer to complete, while my business standing is taking a hit as the constant issues cause me to overshoot my clients' deadlines. I see other guys on the forums who can't even import.
Photo of Pedro Marques

Pedro Marques

  • 169 Posts
  • 26 Reply Likes
New update today of Bridge.
Bridge now version 6.3.0.177 x64
Same bugs, same problems, same lack of attention.
A cloud based company that have teams that don't comunicate.

Arrogance, inchoerence, and lack of competitiveness = Adobe 2016
They live in a pokemom game, making fun of clients.

Please god, make me good but not yet!
Photo of Jaroslav Bereza

Jaroslav Bereza

  • 857 Posts
  • 210 Reply Likes
They say that they have a holiday season right now.
Photo of Pedro Marques

Pedro Marques

  • 169 Posts
  • 26 Reply Likes
That doesn't makes sense. 
Why new release on hollidays?
Does anyone loves to shoot his own foot?
Photo of Rory Hill

Rory Hill

  • 243 Posts
  • 36 Reply Likes
If the folks at adobe want a concrete example of what is wrong then look no further than Bridge.  When adobe switched their apps to the gray look about 4 years ago they broke the javascript UI so that it was no longer possible to render some UI controls including scroll bars.  There is a thread on the Bridge community that has been going for 4 years now without a peep from adobe other than Jeffrey Tranberry saying he had asked someone on the Bridge team to look at it 4 years ago.  You don't have to be a rocket scientist to figure out adobe simply does not care.  I have had to rewrite my workflow scripts to work in Photoshop (where the javascript UI was fixed) without the batch benefits of Bridge.
 
It is this kind of stuff that motivates me to look for alternatives.  All being equal, anything but adobe.  In the last month I have steered 3 people to Capture One and 2 to ACDSee.  Not because they are better products but because the decay has set in at adobe.  It is a shame as I want to love adobe products, with the careful thought into ergonomics, shortcuts and rock solid apps.   But that appears to be the past.
Photo of markinho

markinho

  • 21 Posts
  • 3 Reply Likes
Nice letter.
I sign too.

I sign for the quality, I sign so that Adobe's employes can work peacefully and deliver a software they are proud of, and at the same time a software that we customers are happy to use.

LR probably need a refresh and enhancement, for its user interface and its performances.

Just see how much performance a software can deliver if using the latest technologies, for example Affinity Designer/Photo. Apple Aperture is dead but the good functionalities are alive for ever. Capture One Pro 9 has a nice look.

Adobe, get inspired ! Do not copy, but really get inspired.
Evolve with your customers by giving something great for the money.
Only making cash is not the reason why we are on this planet earth...
(Edited)
Photo of Steve Brown

Steve Brown

  • 95 Posts
  • 15 Reply Likes
Completely agree!

I for one have stopped taking the updates and will remain on the same versions until I find a reason to upgrade. Adobe needs to stop breaking working code by adding new 'bells and whistles' and, instead, concentrate on fixing the hundreds of bugs and performance bottlenecks they already know about!
Photo of Tanja Schulte

Tanja Schulte

  • 115 Posts
  • 42 Reply Likes

and some new "features" doesn ́t even make sense.


take for example the new import dialog in LR.

it makes no sense at all. it ́s for people who have no clue what a folder/directory is.

i fear that ́s the crowd adobe is focusing on now.


adobe told us they worked "closely with the customers" and the import dialog is what customers wanted. NONSENSE!

nobody wanted that new import dialog, it ́s just nonsense what adobe told us.

just look at the negative feedback they got. nobody wanted this stupid crap.


what about developing a raw engine that is up to date?

oh wait.... that would cost too much developing time. 
just hire a few cheap mediocre coders who do half working stuff we can add to our featurelist.


adobes management is profit oriented as any companys management.

but that is the only driving factor for some time.

the product is getting worse and worse. and the only way they can make money from such worse products is SUBSCRIPTION. because people would most likely not buy these new buggy versions.....



(Edited)
Photo of JaapV

JaapV

  • 30 Posts
  • 2 Reply Likes
Since the last time I've encountered no glitches, but I'm not going to update starting from CC 2015.6.1.
Photo of Omar Josef

Omar Josef

  • 64 Posts
  • 7 Reply Likes
I work as a retoucher. I've also been using photoshop professionally since before CS. I remember the main reason I had those days to upgrade my computers is that my clients started shooting with cameras that produced larger and larger images every time. As you know, retouchers work with many layers, although only a few of those are raster layers and most of them are adjustment layers. When you stack a lot of adjustment layers, although simple ones, processing power becomes an issue, as all changes done below those layers have to be processed in real time. So yeah, the larger the images and the more adjustment layers, the more power you need.

I remember every time I upgraded my computer, I would notice a huge improvement in performance. Kind of like "OK, now I can work 24Mp images without it being a pain", and so on. Up to when most of my clients were shooting 80Mp images some 5 years ago. Back in those days, a good computer and a "classic" photoshop version was enough to work with 80Mp images easily.

Those days, a computer upgrade automatically meant a better photoshop experience. But then something happened. Photoshop started using the GPU for zooming and panning (which is a good thing) and also for some filters I rarely use. Right now I'm using a computer many times more powerful than the one I was using 5 years ago, but the images I work on aren't larger. Cameras have gotten better, but the megapixel war seems to be over. Is photoshop snappier than it was 5 years ago even though my computer is much more powerful? NO!

I believe photoshop has implemented new things, but not properly. Simple things like turning layers on and off, working with the ruler, zooming in and out, changing an adjustment layer, feel very bad. The cursor gets stuck to a curve point sometimes. Some other times it's the opacity adjustment that gets stuck in the cursor. Sometimes I have to click outside of photoshop to unstick a tool... I don't know. It's just not snappy. It feels like photoshop is struggling to handle the UI.

I know current UIs are complex. But then, why is it that programs with far more complex UIs like Maya or Cinema4d work super smoothly? They also use the GPU for the UI as they have hardware anti-aliasing and all that.

What a pro needs is a smooth experience first, and then functionality. Nobody needs new blur filters. Nobody needs content aware paraphernalia as it's not usable on a pro level. We know how to retouch images as we've been doing ok for many years. We just want our photoshop experience to be painless and stress free.
(Edited)
Photo of Stephen Leggett

Stephen Leggett

  • 73 Posts
  • 5 Reply Likes
Adobe needs to look at its whole development and release cycle for the 'mundane' stuff, like import, menu commands etc..

I said in an earlier post that the release of Lightroom 2015.6had made issues around capture date worse, I now realise how much worse.

In Lightroom CC 2015.6, on OSX 10.11.5 (and its still there in 2015.6.1 on 10.11.6) Adobe released a bug where just using menu commands you can corrupt your catalog.

How does the corruption occur -
  • The values for Capture Date are held in several places in the catalog
  • I stopped counting at six, not including anything written back to the image or any sidecar
  • Import sets some, Edit Capture Time changes some and Copy/Paste metadata sets some.
  • Needless to say they don’t all change the same places so its easy to get different values in the different places
  • Different parts of the application have different rules when determining which they will use, so the display/behaviour becomes chaotic
Fortunately, I think you can rebuild the user desired values by algorithm.

So Adobe:
  • How did the architecture/design team come up with and approve duplicated storage of the same value?
  • What rules were established to update all the occurrences in step?
  • How did the change in code that writes conflicting values get past its peer review, the developers testing, ...?
  • Why didn’t the internal test team have a suitable set of test cases that looked at Capture Date when this has been a running sore for something like 5 years?
  • Why does this site persist in recommending merging disparate bugs into a single thread?
  • And so on
Photo of Michelle Everette

Michelle Everette

  • 0 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
The current update is costing me time that I don't have any abundance of in this time of year. I started learning with 3.0 in college, and my first purchase was 5.5. I am starting to seriously think about alternative software options.
Photo of Jeffrey Tranberry

Jeffrey Tranberry, Sr. Product Manager, Digital Imaging

  • 15366 Posts
  • 2241 Reply Likes
Official Response
Please take this short survey:

https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/PhotoshopReleaseSurvey

We'd like your feedback on how often you'd like to see Photoshop updated as well as your thoughts on balancing new features, bug fixes and polish to existing features.
Photo of JaapV

JaapV

  • 30 Posts
  • 2 Reply Likes
Just did the survey. Good idea in principle.
Pretty irritating was the fact that I answered half of it with the conviction that it would surely start asking me about Lightroom instead of Photoshop ONLY. Turned out to be a mistake...
Point is that I use Lightroom about fifty times more often than Photoshop.
(Edited)
Photo of Rory Hill

Rory Hill

  • 243 Posts
  • 36 Reply Likes
The survey is a great idea.  You should do one for Lightroom too.  I bet you'll get different feedback for Lr vs Ps.
Photo of john beardsworth

john beardsworth

  • 1169 Posts
  • 290 Reply Likes
'I bet you'll get different feedback for Lr vs Ps."

Not least because of new raw file support.
Photo of Doug Stead

Doug Stead

  • 9 Posts
  • 5 Reply Likes
What a joke!  If you are NOT a Creative Cload user, the only information they deem valuable is ending this survey at question 1.  A telling remonder that if you are a perpetual user, your thoughts have absolutly no value.  "&^%$ you"  is the real message I hear clearly.
Photo of Jeffrey Tranberry

Jeffrey Tranberry, Sr. Product Manager, Digital Imaging

  • 15366 Posts
  • 2241 Reply Likes
@Doug, How so? The survey is about Photoshop and updates. Photoshop CC is the only version that is being updated. I don't see any registered products under you account.
(Edited)
Photo of Jeffrey Tranberry

Jeffrey Tranberry, Sr. Product Manager, Digital Imaging

  • 15366 Posts
  • 2241 Reply Likes
@John, @Rory, @JaapV - I'll work with the Lightroom team to do something similar for Lightroom.
Photo of Cristen Gillespie

Cristen Gillespie

  • 1615 Posts
  • 520 Reply Likes
I was encouraged by all the space given over to further comments—anything we wanted to say in response to virtually every question. That's a big step beyond number crunching to analyze our responses.  You all will have to do a fair bit of reading—no computer to give you the answers. For that, I do indeed thank you.
Photo of Jerry Syder

Jerry Syder

  • 277 Posts
  • 138 Reply Likes
@Jeffrey, I left a very thorough response, hope you get time to read it.  
Photo of Jeffrey Tranberry

Jeffrey Tranberry, Sr. Product Manager, Digital Imaging

  • 15366 Posts
  • 2241 Reply Likes
@Jerry - Thanks! There's a team of folks reading through and compiling.
Photo of Linwood Ferguson

Linwood Ferguson

  • 29 Posts
  • 18 Reply Likes
I'm glad to see the questions being asked.  I wish there had been a bit more emphasis on how bad the QA was; really just the one "have you had to roll back". Very scary in there (and I hope everyone considers it and responds) is the hint of updates being applied without permission.
Photo of Cristen Gillespie

Cristen Gillespie

  • 1615 Posts
  • 520 Reply Likes
> Very scary in there (and I hope everyone considers it and responds) is the hint of updates being applied without permission.>

Caught that one and said Never. But I think where they're coming from is knowing that a lot of people just want the updates to happen without them having to do anything. I've heard quite a few people say they always update the day something comes out and they are upset when they hear about an update and the Cloud doesn't notify them immediately. They don't want to wait around 24 hours or quit and restart to force the Cloud to notice there's an update waiting.

I may be willing sometimes to throw caution to the wind—on one computer, anyway, but I don't like any software to update itself without my permission.  I suspect at most Adobe will offer a preference we can set, the way they do with the ACC.  I'm pretty sure the Photoshop team knows that if they treat us the way Microsoft treated its Windows users, there will be an uprising. <g>
Photo of grauenwölfe

grauenwölfe

  • 216 Posts
  • 82 Reply Likes
Thanks for posting this Jeff + Adobe. I (think) I like the direction and gist of these questions.

One problem, survey "Gateway Timed Out" on me about 90ish % through when I clicked "Next". I took a lot of time to answer every single "additional" area and would hate for it to ALL have been lost. Any method you can see if mine made it through at all or should I just do it again?
Photo of john beardsworth

john beardsworth

  • 1169 Posts
  • 290 Reply Likes
@Jeff There may well be a desire for less-frequent but more QA'd updates, but also a demand for  rapid support of new raw file formats? At present, those two are in conflict. So perhaps a question could be - would Lightroom users like "drop-in" support for new cameras as soon as available, separate from dot releases?
 
Photo of john beardsworth

john beardsworth

  • 1169 Posts
  • 290 Reply Likes
@Jeff There may well be a desire for less-frequent but more QA'd updates, but also a demand for  rapid support of new raw file formats? At present, those two are in conflict. So perhaps a question could be - would Lightroom users like "drop-in" support for new cameras as soon as available, separate from dot releases?
 
Photo of David Dobish

David Dobish, Senior QE Photoshop

  • 197 Posts
  • 50 Reply Likes
We appreciate your thoughtful responses. I can assure you that we are reading all of them. Thank you.
Photo of David Dobish

David Dobish, Senior QE Photoshop

  • 197 Posts
  • 50 Reply Likes
We appreciate your thoughtful responses. I can assure you that we are reading all of them. Thank you.
Photo of JaapV

JaapV

  • 30 Posts
  • 2 Reply Likes
How nice.
Photo of markinho

markinho

  • 21 Posts
  • 3 Reply Likes
Thank you for the survey.
I posted in this conversation so I did also take part of the survey.
Have a great end of week !
Photo of Stephen Leggett

Stephen Leggett

  • 73 Posts
  • 5 Reply Likes
I thought about an what an LR questionnaire might be.

More I thought about it, more I thought it might need to be at least three, depending on what you think LR to be and I'd give very different responses to the following:

1. Asset management

2. An editing tool

3. ‘Consumer toys’

For the following reasons:

1. Asset Management

  • This is my primary use
  • Quality is generally poor
  • There are bugs over 5 years old that haven't been addressed
  • It still corrupts the catalog in that multiple, differing values are stored in different places for the same attribute
  • It gets worse with each release, e.g 2015.7  on macOS ‘lost’ index numbers on the display
  • It shows evidence of coding to work around bugs rather than fixing the bugs, such as handling of Capture Date/Time in the Default Metadata panel.

2. An editing tool

  • I use this less
  • Probably better quality than Asset Management
  • Not convinced that algorithms are good for non-raws, e.g Auto Tone generally seems to over exposure images I think are already over-exposed
  • There are glaring inconsistencies in the UI, so e.g. Auto Tone moves the sliders but Auto Transform doesn’t
  • Same ‘action’ on same image in LR and PS gives different results for many images, e.g. Auto Tone can give wildly different results. For a non-professional this is extremely confusing

3. ‘Consumer Toys’

  • Such as Maps and Slideshow
  • Use these rarely, tried Maps for about a week; doesn’t add that much for me
  • Slideshow - I do use to proof a show, but for a real show I want Chapter Markers etc. and compared to other products LR produces massive output files
Photo of Jeffrey Tranberry

Jeffrey Tranberry, Sr. Product Manager, Digital Imaging

  • 15366 Posts
  • 2241 Reply Likes
@grauenwölfe - Try submitting it again. Sorry about that.
Photo of grauenwölfe

grauenwölfe

  • 216 Posts
  • 82 Reply Likes
It's ok. Did it again a few hours ago. Thanks.
Photo of markinho

markinho

  • 21 Posts
  • 3 Reply Likes
Hello Jeffrey,
Six months later... I am wondering if we will have a feedback from Adobe regarding the survey and all the comments, supports or critics you have harvested ?
Photo of Jaroslav Bereza

Jaroslav Bereza

  • 857 Posts
  • 210 Reply Likes
I also wonder how it will continue :-)
Photo of Cristen Gillespie

Cristen Gillespie

  • 1615 Posts
  • 520 Reply Likes
We're all terribly curious. <bg>
Photo of markinho

markinho

  • 21 Posts
  • 3 Reply Likes
Alright Adobe, I was patient but it has a limit.
And the direction you took with « LR Classic » and compulsory subscription just confirmed where you are heading. Without me. Hasta la vista LR.
Photo of Linwood Ferguson

Linwood Ferguson

  • 29 Posts
  • 18 Reply Likes
I think it's worth noting how lousy Adobe quality control still is.  I just updated my CC for PS and LR. That's a widely used product, and integration between the two is rather fundamental.  The new versions, when fully updated (at least on Windows) gives a spurious warning that you need ACR 9.10 for compatibility even when 9.10 is installed.  Apparently a widely reported bug.

So really -- does it mean that in doing QA no one actually opened a raw file in Photoshop from Lightroom? 

Or they DID open it, saw the error, and shipped the update anyway? 

Or they DID open it, but had all their error messages suppressed so could not see a warning? 

None of these scenarios speaks well to their QA, for such a basic, fundamental, used-ever-day function that shipped broken.  Yes, it works by just ignoring the error message -- but it speaks to a fundamental problem Adobe just does not seem to get.

I really imagine (as I have no real knowledge) that adobe development has outsourced its QA, maybe development, to low bid contract development probably off shore, and has lost control over quality in the name of getting cut-rate labor.  Maybe I'm wrong about cause, but I'm not wrong they have a problem.  And despite the pretense here, there's no evidence of engagement with customers on the issue, just a couple of ill directed surveys, no changes.
(Edited)