Adobe finally pulls plug on ACR for CS6

Looks like Adobe is going to stop supporting ACR for CS6 based on this post.  

http://blogs.adobe.com/lightroomjournal/2015/07/update-to-camera-support-policy-in-cs6.html

stop supporting ACR for CS6

That was inevitable. It is the obvious next marketing step to try to force the holdouts to subscribe to Photoshop CC.

John

Very disappointing. So once I have a camera that requires a CC subscription for RAW conversion, I will likely pull my support for Adobe. C1 is a far superior RAW converter anyway, I have just been too lazy to convert 100% to it for all things RAW but since I own a license, it is likely I'll just use it.

E.J. Peiker wrote:Very disappointing.  So once I have a camera that requires a CC subscription for RAW conversion, I will likely pull my support for Adobe.  C1 is a far superior RAW converter anyway, I have just been too lazy to convert 100% to it for all things RAW but since I own a license, it is likely I'll just use it.

I agree very disappointing indeed!
But no surprise at all, as Adobe is only interested in your money and looks at customers as a major inconvenience they begrudgingly have to deal with in order to get your money. Adobe doesn't hesitate a second before implementing polices that screw over long time loyal customers in order to increase their profits.

Since I've switched from Canon to Sony I'm about to make the switch to C1. It'll be a big learning curve but in the long run I think it will be very worthwhile move as I see the converted file from C1 to be a big improvement over LR.

At least 9.1.1, which was just released, includes the a7R Mk II. I'm not likely to get another camera for a while.

So you guys that are going to use or switch to C1, will that be your only conversion/processing application, or will you still use Photoshop? I too am totally pissed with Adobe and when the time comes will leave them for other alternatives.

I usually use Lightroom first so this doesn't really impact me except when I will want to few an image from a new camera directly with photoshop. I'm still planning on dragging my feet about getting CC.

Tim Zurowski wrote:So you guys that are going to use or switch to C1, will that be your only conversion/processing application, or will you still use Photoshop? I too am totally pissed with Adobe and when the time comes will leave them for other alternatives.

If and when I go to C1 as my primary RAW conversion tool, I would still use Photoshop CS6 to finish the image in most cases.  But C1 can do many more things to an image than ACR or LR can so it would probably result in less Photoshop work but more pre-conversion work.

Of course the other option, and it's a crappy on IMHO, is to simply convert all your photos to DNG with future cameras and then use ACR 9.1.1 or earlier to convert them.  I still wouldn't throw away my original RAW files though which means it essentially doubles the amount of disk space per shoot for the RAWs and who knows when Adobe is going to abandon DNG and then leave you out in the cold that way.  They are a company hellbent on having everybody pay them every month for the rest of your life.  Wall Street loves this model and are pushing Adobe hard to do even more of this stuff.

For now I am set with 9.1.1 until such point that I get a new camera.  My primary landscape body is going to be the a7R Mk II so I think Im set there for at least a couple of years or more.  I'm in trouble though if Nikon does ever produce a D300 replacement which would relegate my D7200 to the sidelines as a wildlife body.  As far as Adobe is concerned, although I would dearly love to have Dehaze, their welcome is wearing out very quickly in my mind.  I am hoping that Google or Topaz or somebody creates an equivalent to Dehaze as that is a tool that I think could be very useful.  Even LR6 users are getting screwed by Adobe desipte their promises to keep LR as a perpetual license product.  They never said though that perpetual license users get the same features as CC users and now you know that they aren't are behaving in a disingenuous manner there too by not giving LR6 users the Dehaze function that LRCC users get.  I truly feel that this company's attitude towards is customers is one of disdain and is absolutely abhorrent.  Perhaps when enough users rebel against their business model, Wall Street will pressure them into unwinding these policies.

As for alternatives to Photoshop, I have tried them all and they are all still in the minor leagues compared to PS.  I'm still waiting for something that is truly as good.  But on the RAW conversion side and even Cataloguing, ACR and LR are a convenience.  C1 is superior in almost every way but it's harder to use and has a much longer learning curve, especially for those of us that have been in a 100% Adobe workflow for many years.

OK, so much for my editorial, glad I got that off my chest

Plus 1 E.J.
I'm following your road with the Sony a7R MKII and my wife is using the a7 MKII.

DxO Optics Pro has the "DeHaze" since the launch of its version 10.

By the way, Capture 1 is also available for monthly subscription. Well, guess it'd be easy for them to switch to subscription-only mode in the future if they want to

DChan wrote: By the way, Capture 1 is also available for monthly subscription. Well, guess it'd be easy for them to switch to subscription-only mode in the future if they want to

That could be said for any software from anyone.  The point is that they haven't and have stated that they have no plans to do so.  if they do, I'll move on to something else.  I absolutely refuse to be on the hook for something for the rest of my life or not have access to my RAW files anymore (on future cameras).

DChan wrote:. . . 
By the way, Capture 1 is also available for monthly subscription. Well, guess it'd be easy for them to switch to subscription-only mode in the future if they want to

I asked Phase One that exact question "Do you have plans to eliminate the C1 perpetual license in the future?" 
Their answer was an emphatic NO! 
We wouldn't do that to our customers. And the subscription and perpetual programs are exactly the same the only difference is the way you pay for it. A lot of C1 customers are pros and some of them like the subscription model for the ease on cash flow.

E.J. Peiker wrote:At least 9.1.1, which was just released, includes the a7R Mk II.  I'm not likely to get another camera for a while.

I saw that too...This is great as I am just about to hit the buy on the new Sony unit. This will be my last camera as I/we head to retirement. Will spend my dollars on travel now to use all this equipment.
 
...As far as Adobe is concerned, although I would dearly love to have Dehaze.
 
there was a link in DPR - PCTalk forum that showed us how to setup the Dehaze in Lightroom 6 and I have succeeded in getting this to work. ( you have to create a series of presets for each degree, I used 5 % changes, but that is not all that big of an issue. It is still non destructive edits so can be reversed) The Lightroom Dehaze setup is very comparable with DXO's version which I also have used especially for our under water images.  It does clear /clean up that haze /smoke/clutter in most images.
 
as a business subscriptions are good as they are recurring costs and that can be used as expenses every month, low cash outlay monthly etc. and for the supplier it means good cash flow every month.  Adobe should be advertising that their subscription cost is "less than a cup of coffee a day". LOL
 
back to playing with the new Windows 10

Doug 

Yes I saw that too but I'm not a LR user Doug
Win 10? you are a brave man!

...Win 10? you are a brave man!

as in all things I always have a backup plan, but so far so good.

I also am a micro 4/3 user so maybe I am nuts...too much dancing under the Auroras over the years.

Tim Zurowski wrote:So you guys that are going to use or switch to C1, will that be your only conversion/processing application, or will you still use Photoshop? I too am totally pissed with Adobe and when the time comes will leave them for other alternatives.

While many use C1 as a standalone, images processed with it can always benefit from a final touch up in PS. I actually use the same PS procedures to fine tune images converted with C1 that I used on images converted in LR.

The root problem with Adobe is unopposed market dominance and the complementary arrogance that follows it like flies follow a cow. Photographers are actually lucky, since we still have a few options to work around; like C1, Elements, proprietary software from camera manufacturers, as well as a bunch of free guerrilla programs. The true victims of the adobeization of the creative world are the independent talents that have to fork over a substantial portion of their meager income to maintain compatibility with media requirements for their submitted files. For example, files created with an affordable alternative to InDesign may cause problems with RIP servers that feed printing presses, even when submitted in PDF format (the ".pdf" extention does not guarantee compatibility with a certain standard. PDF is merely a container that allows its content to be configured in many different ways).

Breaking this dominance will require top software engineering talent and an insane amount of money. Apple would be the logical candidate to fit that bill. Unfortunately this company has turned its back on professional creatives and - judging from what they gave us with Yosemite -  appears to be destined to bring computing down to the Mikey Mouse level.

If you plan to switch to C1, read this before converting your files to DNG.

http://petapixel.com/2015/07/16/why-i-s ... le-format/

Charlie Woodrich wrote:If you plan to switch to C1, read this before converting your files to DNG.

http://petapixel.com/2015/07/16/why-i-s ... le-format/

Quoted from the article linked above:

"...If you take the same raw files (not DNG files!) and open them in both Lightroom and Capture One, side by side, without doing anything to the files, you will notice immediately...

...It’s very easy to see the difference. Compared to the Capture One image, the one processed using Lightroom looks flat and dull..."

You'll find something similar if you use DxO Optics Pro. Whether it's for the same reason I'm not sure but it's possible as DxO also applies different profiles from different cameras and lenses to the files.

There is no point in converting to DNG if you are going to use C1. C1 is individually optimized to each camera's RAW file with 750 test shots before releasing support for a camera.