Hey folks, I'm considering signing up for a year's sub to Adobe's complete Creative Cloud, as it seems to be the most affordable option based on the software I need access to (individual titles would wind up costing me more per month combined anyway), and am wondering if anyone could give me some pros and cons in regards to the service?

No, I refuse cloud services. Hope Poser won't go this way. I feel uncomfortble using software webconnected. I don't like phone home software , how can I like cloud software then ?

I mean, everything I do in my software must somehow be sent to a server. Sounds scary to me , so no way. Never, never, never !!!

Hmm. I used to be against the cloud concept but not so much now as I've been learning more about it. Its only sent to the server if you choose to do so. You can store your work there and access it from other devices, but you aren't forced to as far as I can tell.

I'm looking at it for the social networking benefits and ways to get more exposure for my work.

An absolute veto against. "The cloud" here.

I personally will never use a cloud system if at all possible, although Ambient is right in that Adobe CC is only access to the software, not saving the work. It's not much different to Steam... a way to provide DRM without stupid dongles and things. I'd still read any fine print over ownership/access. with cloud systems like Amazon/Kindle you do NOT own the book/music or whatever. Any documents you store on the cloud can be 'sold' or accessed without your knowledge, and lost entirely if the business that is storing your data folds.I can't understand why any business would use such a service when HDD's are so cheap.

Be sure what you are using it for. Read the fine print.

My company stuck with the last boxed version.  We don't miss the 'improved' features. 

I have a CC subscription and I am satisfied with it. For me it was simple economics. I use PS, Premiere and After Effects and now I get all the other apps as well for pretty much the same price. There is no difference is using the apps itself - they are all desktop based.

You can install the apps in two machines, there are regular updates and so far it all runs smoothly. You need an internet connection to activate the applications and it does a regular check for the subscription validity. It will allow up to 99 days without internet connection (with a yearlsubscription) before it times out.

I store all my files locally and do not use the cloud storage

 Probably a dumb question but what happens when you decide/cannot afford the subscription, are you able to still use whatever you have created?  I am looking for a comparison, If I buy a physical, or even a download software to my desktop but decide not to upgrade I can still use it years later with files I have produced.  What restrictions are there when you stop paying?

Shane, PLEASE don't do it, there are superior products available that are either free or can be purchased as a permanent licence.  I have no sympathy for those who purchase it for Photoshop, because the new GIMP is a better program anyway once you learn it, and has a nice dark interface if you want it now.

But you know what the most amusing thing of all is?

Those people who tolerate the greed just to get AfterEffects.
Little do they realise that "AfterEffects" is pretty much doomed anyway thanks to this beauty the Pro's are moving over to:
Click Here for HITFILM

Want more, want to know what's even funnier?
Those who use LightRoom, because I'm guessing 99% of those sucked-up into Adobe's greed-machine have never even heard of Darktable:
Click Here for DARKTABLE

So let's see what you can do if you let Adobe suck on your wallet every month:

• Photoshop for photo editing - Yet GIMP is more powerful once you learn it
• After Effects for compositing - Yet HITFILM is a superior system altogether
• LightRoom for RAW development and image amanagement - Yet DARTABLE wipes the floor with it in more ways than one

Sure, you can let Adobe constantly suck on your wallet just to use their inferior products (whatever turns you on I suppose).
But then, when you finally dedcide you should never have let them suck on your wallet in the first place, you will be left with nothing.

Here's how to get a better bundle for next to nothing, one more powerful than the Adobe setup, and one you don't have to constantly pay for.

• Replace Photoshop with the new GIMP, it's free, super powerful, and despite what they might tell you, GIMP is most popular 2D editor, not Photoshop.
• Replace LightRoom with Darktable, again, it's free, and has a better design than LightRoom.
• Replace AfterEffects with HitFilm, this program is sooo good that even a desperate for cash loner like me is prepared to buy a copy!

The total cost of a GIMP-DARKTABLE-HITFILM bundle is the cost of HitFilm alone, because out of the three, it's only HitFilm that you would need to pay for.  Buy hey, it's well worth the money, it's incredible, it's only a fraction of what Adobe used to charge for AfterEffects, and on top of all that, it's a permanent licence!

You couldn't have brought this up at a better time either, because right now you can effectively use the old version of HitFilm for free if you buy now, because you'll also get the next Pro version on release (which I hear is about to come end of this month).  Seriously Shane, if you look at the HitFilm stuff you will realise once and for all that you don't need Adobe for anything.

Keep them well away from your wallet, let those with money to burn feed them - there are better alternatives anyway!
Before you do anything, you really need to take a damn good look at that DARKTABLE and HITFILM link.

Click Here for HITFILM
Click Here for DARKTABLE

Don't be a muppet ;-)

The default preference for saving Photoshop files is with "Maximize File Compatility" on. This means that it can be used with earlier versions of Photoshop. You also need to have it on for other applications which need to read it - such as Poser. So I can read all my Photoshop CC files with all the apps which support the PSD format.

If you stop paying, the software will stop working. You keep all your local files, but I assume that if you use cloud storage, you need to save them from there.

PS: As this is the Poser forum it might also be of interest to know that owning a copy of HITFILM will allow you to work wonders on your Poser scenes.

• Ever wanted particles in a Poser scene?
• Ever wanted to create masive cityscapes in almost realtime with both particles and volumetric effects all at once?

Import your 3D models into HITFILM and you can do exactly that!
You can already do that, and the next version is going to be even better!

The fact that the software stop working is a show stopper for me.  Ok I understand that you could use much of the work with another program but if you buy any add-ons, brushes or filters for Photoshop they are then worthless. 

To be honest I am not an Adobe fan anyway having been forced to use one of their products during my brief part of my career in bid support I can't remember the name of it perhaps because my brain refuses to face such a horrror, but I am interested to see the benefits and pit falls of cloud computing.  I can see if you are working in a field of work where Adobe is the norm then this seems to be a cost effective option.  For me, A Paint Shop Pro user for many years it does not seem to provide any benefit.  During my latest stint I stopped upgrading PSP at PSP Pro X2 and only recently upgraded to Pro X7 as it gave me 64bit functionality, but I was able to use Pro X2 for the whole of that period.

I will watch this thread with interest though as I do like to see if there is a point where it would be better for me to jump on board. 

 ... oh, oh, and if you'd like to "expose" yourself like Shane want's to, they have a video wall for you to show off your creations to the world!

And those that refuse a cloud service are wise, I would never use "cloud" services ESPECIALLY if it's run by Adobe, they are, after all, makers of that clunky-tech spyware called Flash Player and have already proven themselves incompetent on a massive scale.

'k, I'll shut up now :-D

I used the Photoshop CC photography program and a stand alone subscription for illustrator CC for a year. Being a hobbyist I thought that splitting up the payments over time might be a better way to go rather than comming up with the prices of upgrades in one lump sum. So I took the plunge shortly after the Photoshop photography program came out. But I did not send anything "to the cloud" for storage. Instead I kept everything on my local machine.   The added features in both apps were cool and I enjoyed the faster speed and better stability- especially with CC 2014. Unfortunately, I needed to free up some room in my budget, so I did not renew and went back to my previously purchased copies of PS and AI CS6.

@Hornet
Same here, I've used PSP X2 for a long time, good program, but it's started to be left idle as I've grown more accustomed to the GIMP.
PSP is good though, and I would otherwise still be using it.

I have a subscription, it is the program used by my place of employment and the one I am most comfortable with. Honestly I do not get all this cloud paranoia, I have never and will never send anything to the cloud. (My job forbids that anyways.) So nothing I have done on my PC has magically ended up in the cloud. Just because you have a sub with the program does not mean you all of a sudden are forced to use that service.

Personally I have no complaints with Adobe CC and all the supposedly superior products have never done it quite as well as my Adobe products. And the compatibility between the programs still beats everything else.

I have a subscription for Photoshop, mainly because of the 3d print support in the actual version, but of course for image editing too.

It's not complicated, and you don't need to use the cloud. But the software costs a bunch over time, and you may not keep it when you choose to let the subscriptiion run out. Not the cheapest solution, but maybe worth the money. At the moment I don't regret it.

That Hitfilm app actually looks kind of interesting. I am still on Old CS3 creative suite with after effects. I understand the reality that the cloud is here to stay But for me I prefer to wait for the day when a superfast broadband 24/7 connection to the web is as ubiquitous&low cost for us all as tap water is here in the U.S.

What you send through the Adobe CC Cloud is exactly what Adobe decides they want you to send through the cloud because they have control over it, not you.  You have no more control over what it sends to them than Microsoft users had over having an upgraded forced upon them.

You have no idea (or control) over what it sends or what it receives, and them giving you an option to switch something on/off doesn't mean it actually makes a difference or takes any notice of that setting whatsoever.  Companies especially ought to have more sense than to use these things for business.  It's not paranoia, it's fact, the web is littered with news articles about what happens when people have no control over their software and those who use "cloud" services.

Given that, I'd say it's not a matter "if" you'll get burned if you use this stuff, it's more a matter of "when".

Like the majority of those who have replied here, I wouldn't use Adobe CC even if it was offered for free, nevermind pay them for it.  I'm not a religious person but we can only pray that poor Shane sees sense and realises that Adobe are only for diehard Adobe Fanboys and Fangirls these days - people are dropping them like dirt.  We have a lot to be thankfull for though, because since Adobe's greed got the better of them and they started doing this greedy money-sucking thing, they've been driving users away and helping the better alternatives out there get a nice strong foothold.

It's the same with what happened with Microsoft and their arrogance.  Windows 8 and the "forced" lack of the Start button was no doubt responsible for pushing more people onto a GNU/Linux distro than anything they've released to date (that's why Windows fanatics now have their button back).  The "forced" upgrade will push even more people away, so let's hope they keep it up, Apple too, because all three of these companies are driving people away and onto the better products.

I'm very familiar with GIMP, and honestly I hate using it (almost as much as I hate using Blender). I've always preferred Photoshop. Currently I have CS4 Design Premium but it's getting pretty dated. 

I will check out Hitfilm, never heard of that one, sounds interesting. The thing is tho, Adobe is an industry standard, and when I'm trying to do professional work even as a freelancer, I have to be able to use professional software, especially when I need to collaborate with others. It's a good plus to be able to put lesser-known titles on a resum'e, but they won't replace the value of being able to list their pro equivalents. Adobe isn't being replaced any time soon. It's in just about every art school in the modern world and most studios. I do try out other freeware apps when I find them and they suit my needs, but there's scads of free software out there that were growing for a while and then suddenly their developers vanished. I don't like the idea of having to pay yearly to continue having access to it, but since those fees can be deducted as a business expense, it's really not so bad - and its much more affordable for an indie artist like myself who can't afford $3,000 - $6,000 for a complete suite of tools right up front.  

Sorry Wolf, crossposted.

Yes, you should check-out HITFILM for sure, best program I've seen in ages, you can do magic with it and the new release is even better.  There are Adobe fanatics holding onto their AfterEffects and CC subscription not reaslising that it's already gone the way of the Dodo thanks to HITFILM.  HITFILM is a true 3D in 2D compositor where the effects actually exist in 3D space (and some other techinical reason I can't remember).  You can do mindbending stuff with it, and like I said, you can even use it as a tool to give your Poser or iClone work a real Cinematic edge.

The next version will replace Premier as well as AfterEffects
They've added proper NLE features as well for the new version - all in the same product - bloody fantastic!

Shane, did you see the new version of GIMP with a unified dockable interface and a dark grey colour-scheme?

...I prefer to wait for the day when a superfast broadband 24/7 connection to the web is as ubiquitous&low cost for us all as tap water is here in the U.S.

That would be nice, however I think the ISPs are moving in the opposite direction on that. There is talk of the bigger ones charging usage rates on top of your basic service, due in large part to so many people using services like netflix, amazon, hulu, etc. and dropping their premium movie channels to lower their current monthly cable bills. Really hope that doesn't happen on a wide scale, but who knows. As it is, you don't really have a choice in which ISP you use, in most areas. In my area Time-Warner is the ISP. They bought out all the smaller guys years ago. If you want high speed internet that's who you're getting it from around here. You could get satellite, but who can afford that? They all want contracts and still charge twice as much as cable. My folks are on satellite TV, and even now their signal still breaks up when it gets cloudy.   No I haven't checked out gimp in a while. I might but it was too frustrating to deal with before so I haven't looked up what they've done recently. It still isn't a viable option for me tho, as no one in the industry really uses it. I never see it listed as a requirement in job ads, but I constantly see Photoshop and other Adobe titles listed. I'm looking into getting certified in Photoshop, Illustrator and a couple others as that will help boost my desirability on job searches.

I've been using the photography package of Photoshop and Lightroom on monthly sub for a while now and am very happy with it. Simple economics - I can afford the low cost each month, whereas even the annual sub was out of reach given my current finances. The apps are downloaded to my desktop (both Mac and PC, as I use both so that's a big benefit) and phone home every 30 days to check the subscription is valid. There is a little CC icon in the Mac menu and a desktop icon on PC that open up the CC app that tells you what apps you have installed, when they last updated and gives access to assets and online community stuff; this does not need to be running to use the software. Everything I do with the apps is on my local machines, I don't use any of the cloud storage. No problem with other apps reading PSD's so there is nothing different in the file format for the CC versions. 

Solid professional apps plus a flexible and sensible way to buy into them; the CC versions suit my situation so I'd recommend them.

The Lightroom/Photoshop workflow for RAW files is awesome ....

Interesting article here about the "different" pricing models adobe are now using.. http://future-publishing.msgfocus.com/c/11wCl0JNSc5MkKt6plJ1YpTJ3M ...theres a similar article around - forget where - but it talks of designers being charged higher prices purely because of the browser they used:(

Adobe products are rapidly losing their "industry Standard" status, and funny enough, it's HITFILM that will be the first product to do exactly that to them.

No one in their right mind is going to pay for an outdated system like AfterEffects and be forced into a subscription to pay for it now that HITFILM is on the scene that is up to date, modern-tech and superior, capable of better results and can be purchased as a permanent licence for a very fair price.  Like I said, people are dropping Adobe like dirt, so choosing to buy into it these days means you're effectively choosing to buy into something that people are breaking away from.

If you're after a job in graphics, blow them away with your portfolio and you'll get the job, it doesn't matter whether they advertise for "Photoshop".  Send in your portfolio and they see the work you are capable of, not what you used to create it.  Further than that, Photoshop's days as "Indusrtry Standard" are rapidly coming to an end, it's inevitable due to the amount of people fleeing from them.

If you want an example of what's going to happen to Adobe, you need only to look at the camera industry and the brands that inhabit it.  It wasn't too long ago that the "Pros" were all using Canon and Nikon, but just as was expected when a brand like Sony enters the ring, they're now getting dropped as "Industry Standard" and the "Pro's" are moving over to Sony like there will be no tommorow.  Soon, Sony will be the "Industry standard" for photographers.  The reason people are flocking over to Sony is because they're making generally better, more innovative cameras than Canon and Nikon have been putting out lately.

Adobe can't compete with the better stuff so they're milking it for all they can, while they can.  You should avoid getting dragged into something that will leave you with nothing, because remember, no matter how much you feed them for your CC subscription, you will be left with no licence at all when you stop paying them.  Meanwhile, others have kept their cash and have been getting to know what will become the new "Industry Standards".

I quite like the CC thing actually - it costs me £9 per month and as I do a lot more photography now than 3D stuff, I need something to process RAW files.  Darktable appears to be Linux only so is utterly useless to me and the plugins I use most are only PS not GIMP.  I'm by no means a "fanboy" of adobe but it works well, it's in industry standard app at the moment and it works for me.  The cloud part is largely irrelevant

"I quite like the CC thing actually - it costs me £9 per month and as I do a lot more photography now than 3D stuff, I need something to process RAW files.  Darktable appears to be Linux only so is utterly useless to me and the plugins I use most are only PS not GIMP.  I'm by no means a "fanboy" of adobe but it works well, it's in industry standard app at the moment and it works for me.  The cloud part is largely irrelevant"

I get that and the industry standard aspect of it , the bits I don't like is the cloud and the fact that within 30 days of me stopping my £9 a month I lose the ability to process RAW files using that product.  Not so if I have purchased a program outright.

The basis of my cloud reluctance stems from trust and what is done with the information that the corporations have.  I know communications better than the cloud so let me give you an example.  With our smart new phones we have the ability to ensure that our number is not displayed if we so wish.  What most users don't know is that feature does just that, stops the display of the originating number.  The number is still present and is contained in the call set up message at every stage of the call.  Which means corporations using 'Intelligent Networks' can base the way the handle that call based on the origination number.  They can adjust the routing, or re-routing, the call priority, call charge and many other factors.  All based on the number that most users think is withheld....it is not, it is just not displayed.  That is just one example, there are many more, enough for me to give as little control as possible to big business.

 

I can't speak to having any direct experience with CC.  But I do think it's wise to be cautious when approaching subscription services like this.  The fact is that more and more it's all going to add up and you can only swing so many subs before it nickle and dimes you to death.  Then if you stop paying versus purchasing right out, then that whole sub money actually went towards nothing, it's not like it was investing in paying the price off.  I do have softwares that you get X amount of time of free updates once you purchase or you get updates through version X, but I have no issue with it and it allows  you to evaluation if the new features of the new version are worth continuing to invest in it - but with those, you can use what you have paid for.  Personally, I just find it all kind of "schemey" but if it works for you, then great!

But isn't that really no different than paying rent on a house or apartment? You never actually own the place. Stop paying the rent and they boot you. Property taxes are the same. Even if your mortgage is paid after 30 years or however long, you still have to pay property taxes the rest of your life - aka rent - or you get booted. And in some areas of the US, property taxes are higher than 12 months of mortgage payments.

The sub money goes towards the use of the software for however long you chose to 'rent' it. They don't prevent you from accessing the files and projects you created during that usage, only the files you have in storage on their servers, which seems to be up to the user whether they store their files there or not, based on what others have said here, and things I've read elsewhere. There are other programs that can read .psd files. (I'm not sure about .ai files), Videos you create can be played in a number of players, etc.   

I used to think that using the apps meant that everything you created in them were automatically created in the cloud and not on your PC, but that's obviously not the case. For $600 a year (or $50/mo.) I can have access to most all of their software and automatic updates, vs. $20/mo. for each individual app. (some of their apps aren't yet included in CC and still have to be purchased separately but I don't really have much use for those apps anyway), along with free website/portfolio hosting and access to a network of other artists and potential clients/collaborators.  I never upgraded from CS4 before cause it would have cost me another couple grand or more to do so and just could never afford it. I was going to sign up for another years' worth of web hosting at the old host I was using but that's another $150 yr and I have to build the site myself - or find a designer I can afford, which isn't possible at the moment for me.

Anyone using e-mail or automatic back-up services like Carbonite, etc., are using the cloud. So I don't get what all the paranoia is about. And there is no such thing as an unlisted phone number. It just means it doesn't show up in a directory. There are a lot of marketing agencies that pay big money for "unlisted" phone number lists - I used to work for one of them. 

only the bold succeed.

Well said Pumeco and thanks for the link to Hitfilm, looks interesting.  I've been using Blender's video editor instead of Premiere and am pleased to report that it hasn't crashed once!  Blender's motion tracker is brilliant and there are lots of replacements for Photoshop. 

I'm not a fan of subscription software for most of the reasons previously mentioned. Fortunately for me I've always had access to the latest Adobe packages through my job. We have no plans to go CC anytime soon. Adobe did make money off our company with their offering though as we decided to upgrade from CS5 To CS6 shortly after the cloud was announced. We're going to see how long we can hold out. I'm happy with that as we don't need to share files outside the office, only use InDesign, Photoshop, Acrobat and, rarely, Illustrator.

I personally don't lust for the latest versions of any software (I'm still trying to talk myself into upgrading to Mountain Lion, lol). A lot of really talented, successful artists use older software because they understand that creativity can't be purchased from Adobe. 

I think if I had needs for compatibility and access to many different packages I might feel differently. You should choose what's right for you knowing the plusses and minuses going in.

I just really hope Adobe isn't successful though. It is a money grab and once they get all the creatives in the fold watch those prices increase. What ya gonna do about it? And don't forget about the great CC crash of a couple of months ago. Had half the industry up in arms.

Shane, even with all the concerns about "Cloud Usage" put to one side, I'm starting to wonder if there's something you really aren't getting regards how their greedy system works.

Remember that thread not too long ago, the one where Game Engines were discussed?  Unreal Engine was brought up in the discussion, that too is a "Subscription Based" purchase but it's one that is perfectly fair.  Do you know why an Unreal suibscriptipon is fair, and an Adobe one isn't?  It's because although an Unreal Engine subscription cost's $19 per month, you can cancel your subscription any time you like and you still have a permanent licence for the version you were running while your subscription was active.  This means, for example, that even a brand new user could take out an Unreal Engine subscription and cancel it minutes later.  They still have a permanent licence to the version that was available when they took that subscription out - and I can vouch for it first hand - because that's what I have.

Even better, what it means is that you can effectively choose to upgrade your Unreal Engine to the latest version any time you wish, and you know it will only cost you $19 to do so because you simply buy a months subscription and then cancel it again.  You can do this if and whenever you wish, no penalties, it's a perfectly fair system.

Compare that to the Adobe greed-machine which, no matter how much you pay into it, you will NEVER own a permanent licence of that product, not even if you'd subscribed for long enough to cover what would have been the retail price of the product, and that is what is truly unacceptable about Adobe's greedy system.  Such a system ought to be illegal because it means that those who supported them and put in the years learning their products, have been "forced" into a payment system most of them they don't want anytthing to do with (which is why they're dropping them like dirt).  Even worse, they have not left the option open for a permanent licence if you want to do it that way.  No matter what Adobe says, there is no getting around the fact that once you have covered the cost of a retail version, there is no reason (other than outright greed), why you should not be entitled to keep that as a permanent licence.

I mean, what happened, did the world suddenly change overnight and decide that the right to own a licence outright was no longer possible?
Of course not, it's only the greed-machine that is Adobe who have decided that fate for their "customers" .

Unreal Engine is proof these things can be handled in a fair manner, they are the polar opposite of Adobe.  Remember, forcing you onto a subscription was bad enough, but denying you a permanent licence even when you have covered the cost of a retail licence, should be illegal, and if you stand for that, you have quite a high threshold for taking sh*t from companies.  There's really no polite way to say this, but my advice regards "Adobe" is tell them to take a cliff-dive (that's as polite as I can get, but not the term I wanted to use).

Good luck with whatever route you take, there's nothing more I personally have to say about it because to me, there is nothing more to it than blatant, outright greed :-D

Have fun letting Adobe suck on your wallet while the rest of us get a permenent licence to HITFILM :-D

@kljpmsd
You're very welcome, and just so you know, the team behind HITFILM are gold, they're a really cool down to earth bunch.  Doesn't matter whether you're a pro or an amateur on their forum, they talk to you and interact with equal respect :-)

I hear what you're saying about the greed factor, Pumeco. I don't care for it either. And if there were more alternatives to it than there currently are I would be exploring those. 

However, the bottom line is that I have to get out of the hobbyist market and move towards the professional market, where I can actually make a living on what I do, That requires investing in software that the professional side of this industry requires me to learn and use regularly in order to have a snowball's chance in hell at getting hired or taking on contracts for large studios where the real money exists. It's competitive enough as it is without making things harder on myself due to my own personal agreements or disagreements with the business practices of this or that company.

So while I am all for having alternatives like Hitfilm, GIMP and Blender out there for the hobbyists and low-budget studios, please show me real job listings that list these titles in their qualifications. I've never seen them listed, and I search every CG-related jobs board I can find on a regular basis. 99% of them list Adobe as a requirement. When I was in school, Adobe was a requirement, and still is at that school and every other school I've looked at. It's difficult enough breaking into the industry at my current skill level, I don't need to make waves by being a rebel against "the man". I need a job, and in order to get one of those jobs that are actually going to pay me a living wage, I have to use the software that they require, whether I want to or not, not the software that I prefer. It's not enough to be good, you have to know how to use the software that the studio you're applying to or the client you're trying to do a job for, requires, and most of them - all the ones I've found - require proficiency in Adobe and Autodesk.

ETA: If I were trying to build my own studio, then I would have a bit more flexibility on that decision, and I could use whatever I wanted as long as the end result was polished, but even with that, studios still do work for other studios, and still require knowing the software that those other studios are using. I don't have the means to build my own studio at this point anyway tho, so that's not even worth thinkin about right now. 

I use GIMP on one machine and PS5.5 on the other. At first, using GIMP was a trial. I hated it. But because I couldn't install PS5.5 on that machine, it was either boot up the other every single time I wanted to edit an image, or learn GIMP. So I've been learning GIMP. I've gotten much more used to it, and there are very few things that I cannot do with it that I can do with PS5.5.

However, those "very few things" are essential sometimes. Moreover, despite the fact that there are plugins to GIMP to allow PS plugins to work, they aren't surefire. So I have some utterly essential plugins that only work with PS.

So I'm at the point that I can do MOST things with GIMP just fine. But I still end up having to take my image to PS5.5 to finish it.

GIMP is fantastic and gets better with every update, but it is not yet a complete substitute. And until plugin makers start supporting it, it will never be a complete substitute.

I expect most open source/free/low cost substitutes will have similar issues. Whether or not they do for any given user will depend on how deeply they've investigated each app, and which features they actually use.

As for using the cloud and subscription based licenses... I'm not a fan, but I also don't think it's some enormous conspiracy to suck away my precious pictures of Vicky in a temple. And it DOES permit me the option of accessing apps that would normally be too expensive. I actually wish C4D and Maya had subscription options, for instance.

HItfilm does look good, though. Really good.

Shane, the fact that you can claim the cost as a business expense changes a lot. Adobe are the industry standard, so if that's what you need, then do it. It is, as you say, like renting a house. When you stop paying, they boot you. Monthly payments for a professional (I count indies that do something for a living) is easier for budgeting.

I started my professional life as a graphic designer in the early 1980's (with paint, ink and illustration board). The computer of choice was the Mac because the OS came with a paint program bundled with it. That program was made by Adobe. To this day, graphic designers are taught to use Adobe products on Macs. THAT is the reason it is the industry standard; blind conservatism and falling for the product push (or, 'I don't want to risk falling behind'). Go into any printing business in Australia and you will see PC's in the admin area and Macs in the graphics area... why? Because that's all they are taught at school. They don't know how to use Photoshop or InDesign or Illustrator on a PC, despite it being identical software. I mentioned this to a print shop owner, who agreed it would be cheaper to buy all PC's and have them properly networked and integrated through the business, but they said they would never be able to find a designer who would use them. They are not the industry standard because they are good, they are the standard due to legacy and conservatism.

I use Photoshop, Illustrator and InDesign on a PC. I was taught on a Mac, but as a starving ex student, couldn't afford the computer. So I got a PC, hated Windows for a while, then realised it was no different... you just hate different things between the OS's.

Currently I lecture at university in a business faculty. My area is strategic foresight, so I teach the implications of emerging technologies and emerging/shifting business models. The only way conservative views will be overturned and other software become 'standard' (or rather, when there is a wealth of software that is 'acceptable') is by Indies producing signature work that cannot be replicated in Adobe products. Art directors can spot non-Adobe stuff a mile off (don't know how), so if it's good, they'll be interested. If you can do something that they can't, and it's cheaper to go to you rather than learn how to do it themselves, they will keep going back to you. The big advantage of things like Blender, GIMP, even Hexagon and Carrara and Poser, is that they are cheap enough to let the Indies in. You don't need the big studio to pay the stupid prices of the big companies. Of course, the other thing is that if you are a true Indie and use free software you don't have the overheads of larger businesses so you can be very price competitive. You clients won't know what software you used, nor will they care.

I have the current 3DS Max on my system. It's free, because I'm a lecturer (education licence). I don't use it any more. I use the free stuff like Blender, or the cheaper stuff like Hexagon. Full commercial licence, for free.

Do what works for you, Shane. Just be prepared to change when you see an opportunity. Don't be a blind sheep.

Client compatibility is another issue. I can't get GIMP to export in PSDs, and I can't get Photoshop to open XCFs. (Can it be done?) And if a client uses Photoshop, I am not going to get them to switch to GIMP just to open my files.

Job search is another. If you're a paralegal, for instance, you had better be extremely well-versed in MS Word or Word Perfect (and most law offices are moving towards Word for -- better client compatibility -- that magical requirement). Open Office is a fantastic app for dictation. Its autocomplete puts Word to shame. The rest of it is an utter travesty -- but you can get your docs done in it nevertheless. But if you don't know Word or WP, you WILL NOT GET A JOB that requires them. Hell, you won't even get an interview. (The last thing your boss wants is a junior who is constantly bugging senior employees with questions like, "How do I do [such and such] in [insert software] again?") When it come to apps like Excel, people who THINK they know the software (but can only kinda use it on a basic level) can wreak havoc on spreadsheets that are already being used (they move a single field to make it "more visible" not realizing it contains differential equations that are linked to 20,000 other spreadsheets LOL). I'm sure the same is true in all industries for whatever software is used by a company.

It's one thing to be able to produce a finished portfolio. But when you're working with a team, every step of your work has to be compatible with theirs, not just the end product. Chances are, you're NOT going to be the one producing the final version anyway.

@piersyf: I try not to be a sheep. I too was trained on a mac in school, but my mac died not too long after leaving school and I haven't been able to afford another since. Mac and Adobe pretty much have a permanent grip on the art schools. I use all my software on a custom-built PC and have no problems with Photoshop, Illustrator, Dreamweaver, etc. 

I do try to learn other lesser-known software when I have the time and interest, but it does me no good when I'm trying to find real work in the industry, as I'm trying to do now. Mention GIMP or Blender at one of these job interviews and they're likely to just laugh you out the door. Or smile and nod silently as they move on to the next portfolio and I definitely don't need that. 

I started learning digital painting several years ago on Jasc Paintshop Pro (I think Corel owns it now), and I had one class in film school that used GIMP - simply because they weren't budgeted for Photoshop and it was only used for one small project. I continued working (and fighting) with GIMP until I got into Animation and had to start using Photoshop on a regular basis. It's always been much faster to learn and much easier to work with than GIMP, at least in my opinion, which is why I prefer it, on top of being a standard. But as Moriador points out, it doesn't matter what software you prefer to use, or what your moral reasons for or against it are, if you don't use the software your potential boss/client requires, then you're S.O.L. There's enough competition and someone else will be along in 1.5 seconds or less that can meet that client or bosses needs. Run with the big dogs or stay on the porch is really what it all boils down to. 

@moriador: Autodesk does have subscription to all their software too, along with cloud features and training/support - their entertainment creation suite (Maya, 3DS, SoftImage, MotionBuilder & Mudbox), is $340/mo., $855 quarterly or $2,730/yr, but they also still have the option of buying a license outright, at $6,825. You still have to pay for ugrades with that tho, which is another $4K. At least with the sub, all upgrades are included as long as you continue the sub. 

I think Shane's problem isn't his understanding of the situation, it's more a fear of rejection.  It's a fear that nine times out of ten is going to be unfounded because no employer, regardless of whether they specified "Photoshop", is going to dismiss him on the grounds that he'd used a different program instead.  You send your portfolio no matter what they askled for, because a potential employer sat at his/her desk, going through the pile of portfolios for a position in graphics, is always going to hire the one who's portfolio is the most attractive to them.  I think specifying "Photoshop" is something of an automatic habit for most of them, when actually, they couldn't care less about what was used to produce it as long as it falls within their budget for providing you with that tool and maintaining it.

Perhaps the only time that would not be so is if they develop stuff specifically for, say, Photoshop.

Photoshop is "Industry Standard" (for now), but it is no more "professional" than GIMP, and as any full-on GIMP using pro will tell you, GIMP runs rings around Photoshop in it's capabilities once you've mastered it.  Same with Blender, Blender is a more capable tool than those you see as being more "Professional".  Blender knows no limit, it's really only the users capability that is the limit of what can be done with it.

As for HITFILM, the program is "Professional" even at it's current version, version 2 - and version 3 will be an even bigger nail in the coffin for AfterEffects, later this month.  HITFILM, DARKTABLE, BLENDER, GIMP, they're all incredibly powerful, stable, "Professional" tools that are being used (more and more) in "Professional" environments. 

They're more "professional" and powerful than the crap people are paying good money for :-D

If the situation with employers is down to software snobbery, then you'd be better off going it alone anyway - that's what I'll be doing.  That's the beauty of all this stuff, I mean bloody hell, what couldn't you do with a CAMERA, HITFILM, BLENDER, and GIMP!  You have the equivalent of a complete Hollywood studio on your desktop.  There was a guy, if I recall he was from 20th Century Fox and was responsible for producing and compositing many of the 3D elements in a whole bunch of recent movies.  He was speaking at a Blender meeting and took great pride in pointing out that although either Max or Maya (can't remember which) got all the credit for the effects, he'd actually used Blender, and more than that, the people on his own team were puzzled how on earth he did it so quick without them even knowing about it.

I'll post the video if I can find it :-D

That said, I'm not an expert, and I do understand why Shane fears to go in that direction.
I think it's a stupid take in the overall scheme of things, but like I said, I do understand his concern.

There's nothing against using various software titles in your portfolio or demo reel. In fact in a lot of cases it can be seen as a major plus as it shows diversity in your skillset. The rejection comes when they ask you "can you do this in After Effects too?" "Can you do this in Maya as well?" When you tell them no, sorry, I don't know those programs, that's when they move on to the next applicant. They don't have the time or resources to train you on the software they use and they're not going to wait around for you to learn it on your own. You should have done that before you applied. Most studios don't make it a habit of changing out their main applications every other year and a lot of them won't even invest in upgrades on a regular basis. So when they list Photoshop or After Effects, Maya or Max in their job requirements, they mean exactly that, they don't mean "or similar" unless they state as such, because different software packages handle the same functions quite differently. Just because you know how to use Blender and can fly through it like a pro, by no means suggests you have a clue what to do in Maya. They are two entirely different packages.  In a studio environment, you're rarely working alone, and even if you are working alone your work will often be passed on to the next guy or the next team. A modeler will model, then pass the model on to the rigging team, and from there to the animation team. Everyone in that chain needs to be on the same page and be using the same software. 

It may help for people to realise that Shane is dealing with 2 issues; one is the idea of being an indie with his own set up. In that case, portfolio rules, regardless of software. If the client likes what you can do, they really don't care HOW you produced it. I feel that is Pumeco's line. The second issue is Shane applying for a job. In that he is absolutely correct; the studio doesn't care what you can produce in 'X' software if they don't use that software... they only care if you can produce with what they have already invested in. For that, you need to keep up the skill sets in that particular software. The industry will become a lot more fractured yet, but for now, the 'big dogs' dominate.

It seems ironic that people think HitFilm will topple Abode. Adobe is not who they need to topple. They need to topple the user base.

To say that HitFilm is more professional is sort of pushing it. Hitfilm uses OpenGl to render, which means that a render engine that uses Cuda, ATI Stream/Mantle, or PHI, (or a combination of all 3) will blow OpenGl's doors in. Even more so on a server with lots of gpgpu's on it. If a gpgpu does not know how to do an OpenGl call, it reverts to the cpu. IE slow as a snail.... Not all OpenGl calls can be done on the gpu either. Home users can build an 11 gpu system, and that is per box with off the self parts from most computer stores.... (1 onboard, Four 2 gpu cards) Surf Ebay, and you can get server boards with 8 PCIe slots and onboard graphics. That is up to 17 gpus per blade....

There are other players in that market that have superior software to both Adobe and Hitfilm..

Eyeon: Fusion, not cheap, used by lots of studios. Fusion uses the gpgpu for far more than just rendering

The Foundry: Nuke Studio, again, not cheap. Node based and very easy for a Houdini user to learn and integrate. Nuke uses the gpgpu for more than just rendering as well.

There are plenty more as well.

So where does that leave the Adobe After Effects? Depends how you look at it doesn't it.

That basically leaves Adobe with the people that are familiar with using it in their pipeline. In the end it really does not matter what Person A thinks about what Person B should use.

All of us should use what we are comfortable using. And if you are on a team, you will have to use what they use.

It won't do much good to be a Blender/HitFilm expert if the team uses Houdini and Nuke, you would be completely lost and unemployed rather quickly.

If you can get away with using the free stuff out there, more power to you. Knowing how to use all of the above is even better for your portfolio

Bottom Line:

Use what you want too, use what you have too.

The Cloud argument is a moot point if all you use it for is checking a subscription and getting updates, etc... 

I chose to update to Adobe's CC when I decided to use the quixel suite in my work. It works best in recent versions of 'shop but not so much on CS4, which is what I had before making the switch. I am not a fan of subscription services, I prefer owning the software outright but you do what you have to do to keep yourself relevant to potential employers and stay up on what's going on in the industry. Until quixel moves their suite to a standalone app, I'll probably maintain my subscription. The updater isn't as intrusive as some others, so I don't mind using it. I say go for it. If you can afford it, it's not the axis of evil people seem to think it is. 

Shane (your reply earlier),

That's true but you can also rent to own, given the financial means to do it and whatnot.  There are also things we don't rent.  Well, there are rental cars but you don't rent "your" car.  You don't rent your TV and rent to own you eventually pay it off.  I might think differently if it was going towards paying off the full price... now that would be fair to me.  You pay it off as you rent + interest for the convenience of making small payments.  It just really doesn't work for me, not saying it's evil or whatever. I don't want it.  I just feel with this cloudy scenario we are being shoehorned into getting used to and eventually accepting renting every single little thing.  Again if someone else is totally cool with the eventual scenario of renting 2 dozen pieces of software and all that, great!  I certainly will pay right out or go open source over the rental thing, no matter what alternative it comes to.  I like the companies that offer multiple "Choices".  Rent it, buy it, whatever it.

You don't "rent" your car, but plenty of people lease them. It's a good way to ensure that you are pretty much always driving something 2 years old or less. If you're the kind of person who drives their vehicle into the ground, leasing might even be cheaper. :)

On the other hand, we're all used to "subscribing" to cable TV and paying ridiculous prices for a whole butt load of channels we never, ever watch. We don't complain about not owning the shows and movies that we've paid for, do we? Given what I've paid for cable in my life, Adobe's sub rates seem rather tame.

What most of you seem to forget when you write this stuff is that the year is now 2014.  The days of having to stomach Adobe are long gone, there are better, cheaper alternatives.  Worrying about what an employer wants is another thing that effectively went out with the Dodo if you use your noodle.  Like I said, the year is 2014 and in this day and age, we have the power to start our own companies on zero budget.  The days of being driven like a slave only remain for those sucked-in to the old way of doing things.

Shane is obviously looking for work, aren't we all, but what is it about what he wants to do that makes him want to be empolyed rather than be his own boss?

• If he's good, he doesn't need an employer, he can go it alone (that's how companies are formed, it's not fantasy, that's what happens).
• If he's crap, he'd fail in businesss, but then agan, he won't get employed either.

Why take the route to employment these days?
Be your own boss, the "Indie" has never had so much power and ease to do so, as they do right now!

Get a website, be your own boss!

A more dependable salary.

Affordable health insurance and the ability to actually start saving for retirement. I am 40 after all, and it just gets harder from here on out.

A weekend off here and there. 

The ability to start paying off my massive student loans and try to rebuild my credit. 

Being your own boss isn't nearly as glamorous as you think it is. I've done it for the last 4 years. Sometimes the money is good, but most of the time it's nickles and dimes, if anything at all, especially in the hobbyist market. I can't live on that. 

The median annual salary for my degree field in the US is $60 - $70K. I'd be happy if I could make just half of that at this point working at an actual company.

I want to build my own studio, but I just don't have the resources for it right now. I need a stable income. My other option is to go find some brain-dead retail job with minimum wage and no future (and I've been applying for those jobs too, with zero luck so far cause no one around here is hiring). That's the biggest reason I left that kind of work to go to school, but at this point I was better off back then, cause at least I could afford a full tank of gas in my truck. 

Comparing the purchase/rental of an house with software subscription, I suggest, is not a fair analogy, I accept what you say is true in that, if you don't pay the rent you are thrown out and on a purchased house you will still pay tax, there is no alternative.  With software subscription there is an alternative, for now at least, you buy the product outright and use it without paying any further rental or taxes.

There is often an thin line between being paranoid and having a healthy interest in how your personal information is used, by who, and for what purpose.  Each person creates their own boundaries, some will be nearer to my view of being paranoid, some further away but I am not going to condemn either camp.  Cloud computing means I have to trust a company's servers to be there when I need them and to have a fast, reliable broadband connection to be there when I need it.  I am firmly in the "if it can go wrong, it will go wrong" camp hence my reluctance to trust another entity to supply that 24/7.   Cloud computing may well be the way of the future but there are a few benefits from growing old and in my case I am at an age will it will not HAVE to be part of my future.

"Mention GIMP or Blender at one of these job interviews and they're likely to just laugh you out the door."

Again, you need to remember this is 2014, the days of Autodesk fanboys doing their best to maike their bad decision look wise, are long gone - they can't pull it off anymore because people would simply laugh back at them.  No one laughs at Blender these days (unless they're a retard perhaps).  There has been a clear change on that front, Blender is now gathering the respect it deserves at an alarming rate.  The only people who laugh at Blender these days are those with a nervous laugh, and those "nervous laughs" usually eminate from supporters of software that cannot compete with Blender.  These days, Blender is the almighty workhorse that people admire and look up to, and I'm guessing is causing quite a few nightmares for the directors of the lesser, overpriced products.

Laugh at Blender these days?
Goog god man, you sound like you've not seen a Blender vid on YouTube for about five years or something ;-)

Heh ... hehe ... hehehehehe :-D