Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - gigantoad

Pages: [1] 2
1
In the same way that no workman would rent his work hammer to work, digital artists should not accept the rental model in its current form. Software as a service is a the new talk of the town on how to milk consumers for cash. In the long run it will not work once every company is only selling rental software services and people realize that the collective they have to pay per month will outpace the pre-paid software licenses they used to own.

This is just not a correct comparison. Software isn't a physical object you buy. You never own the software, you buy a license to use it. Perpetual just gives you a license that is valid forever. At least in theory, at some point you might need an update so the software still works on your new system. The continuous part of software has always been there. You bought updates, you extended maintenance. All words for development over time, making the software better and hopefully cater to user input. That really is a service of sorts.

A screwdriver doesn't get updates. It doesn't need to be continuously developed. No features are added over time. It may very well break down at some point, then you have to buy a new one. Also there are definitely cases where even physical objects are rented out. Some expensive machinery, a Red camera that you only need for a short time during production etc.

2
If Adobe could understand the vast percentages they have lost in $$ from that, they might change their tune (tho I wouldnt hold my breath lol)

Sadly, this is not the case. CC has been an immense success story for them. The numbers just do not support this. They haven't lost anything, they have gained. I don't doubt that is exactly what Adobe told to Allegorithmic as well. Don't believe the shitstorm, here are the actual numbers that clearly show the vast majority of people are all over CC. And then of course you can add on top of that other positive (from Adobe's point of view) aspects of CC, like a more controlled and steady stream of money with less risk which results in better development of the software (if it only were so but I'm sure that's what they're saying).

Oh, no doubt. I didn't mean to infer CC tanked... I just meant there is still a large demographic that didn't buy in. So they could make even more money if they'd offer perpetual (and FTR, Im not going by here... its a sentiment that's prevalent all over the web)

Yeah, I do wonder how large that demographic actually is in the grand scheme of things. Is it maybe just the dreaded vocal minority? I'd hate that, but it's a definite possibility.

3
If Adobe could understand the vast percentages they have lost in $$ from that, they might change their tune (tho I wouldnt hold my breath lol)

Sadly, this is not the case. CC has been an immense success story for them. The numbers just do not support this. They haven't lost anything, they have gained. I don't doubt that is exactly what Adobe told to Allegorithmic as well. Don't believe the shitstorm, here are the actual numbers that clearly show the vast majority of people are all over CC. And then of course you can add on top of that other positive (from Adobe's point of view) aspects of CC, like a more controlled and steady stream of money with less risk which results in better development of the software (if it only were so but I'm sure that's what they're saying).

4

Once again nothing at all has been decided. We noticed (and already knew) that perpetual license would be on top of the list of the concerns (even if ironically it's by far the least purchased option, but the fact that "it's possible" is key)

So as we don't do bullshit messages: nothing is decided yet, multiples options are being discussed, for you guys, for current Adobe customers, so there are good chances to see different options to fit the different needs. So wait and see on this one.

For someone that doesn't invest emotion in to these things and I am new here (5 day old subscription) I was looking forward to getting a perpetual license as I feel SPand SD has everything I need at this point in time. Maybe a bit naive given I am just learning. But if Adobe was to scrap them then please make sure they drop the price to make it affordable in the long run like they did with Photoshop. I am one of the few that don't mind the Pricing and Subscription model of Photoshop only. :) It helped me no end to start to earn and now with SP and SD I can grow that business.

Seeing the immense success that CC was and the amount of people subscribed, I'd say you're one of many not few. Photoshop is dirt cheap and Adobe should be given credit at least for that. It's their flagship product and they didn't have to create such an affordable sub for it.

Other than that I'm not a fan of CC at all, and wish there was a perpetual or even a rent-to-own option, but I do feel this is one aspect that needs to be recognized. Photoshop is more accessible today than ever.

5
1) It makes Painter look easy to use
There's no fast mouse movements or anything too complex going on. It makes the viewer think "hey, I could easily stamp my logo onto a 3D product! That's awesome!"

THIS IS NOT A GOOD THING. We are using and want PROFESSIONAL software, not Adobe Stock 3D Asset Stamp and Post Instagram bait.

I have to point out one very strange thing going on in this thread. On the one hand we have calls like this for professional software, on the other we have probably the same people complaining that CC rental scheme is too expensive... at 10 bucks a month for Photoshop. I'd say at least pick one, because both is pretty silly.

It's $10 a month in 12 month commitments, cancel early and you pay every remaining month of that year, also you never own the software and pay forever and ever and ever, also it requires you install a bloated, so poorly made it's borderline malware CC launcher.

Painter + Designer + B2M with Substance Source credits are $20 combined, they can be cancelled at any time without commitment fees, you can buy perpetual licenses or convert a 12 month rental license into a perpetual and each one is a standalone program installed from its own .exe with no bloated launcher.

They are not comparable in any way.

Still for anyone proclaiming they need professional software, 10 bucks a month is ridiculously cheap. No matter how long you pay it, Photoshop for 10 bucks a month is a steal.

No, the only steal happening on this business model is the theft Adobe is committing by making you pay forever and never own anything. You're not pointing out anything, you're being a contrarian for the sake of standing out online.

It's cute that you keep hanging onto Photoshop too, and ignore the $20.99 price tag for everything else they sell, all individually. You won't pay $20 for the Substance Suite, you'll pay $20.99 for B2M, $20.99 for Designer and $20.99 for Painter.

Just like you have to today if you want Premiere + After Effects + Audition as a full video creation suite.

Yeah yeah, ok. Claim to be a pro and that 10 bucks a month for an industry standard software is theft. I'm not trying to stand out by the way, if you go back in this thread you see me just as worried as everyone. That doesn't mean I can't point out some things that (gasp) may defend Adobe just a little bit.

6
1) It makes Painter look easy to use
There's no fast mouse movements or anything too complex going on. It makes the viewer think "hey, I could easily stamp my logo onto a 3D product! That's awesome!"

THIS IS NOT A GOOD THING. We are using and want PROFESSIONAL software, not Adobe Stock 3D Asset Stamp and Post Instagram bait.

I have to point out one very strange thing going on in this thread. On the one hand we have calls like this for professional software, on the other we have probably the same people complaining that CC rental scheme is too expensive... at 10 bucks a month for Photoshop. I'd say at least pick one, because both is pretty silly.

It's $10 a month in 12 month commitments, cancel early and you pay every remaining month of that year, also you never own the software and pay forever and ever and ever, also it requires you install a bloated, so poorly made it's borderline malware CC launcher.

Painter + Designer + B2M with Substance Source credits are $20 combined, they can be cancelled at any time without commitment fees, you can buy perpetual licenses or convert a 12 month rental license into a perpetual and each one is a standalone program installed from its own .exe with no bloated launcher.

They are not comparable in any way.

Still for anyone proclaiming they need professional software, 10 bucks a month is ridiculously cheap. No matter how long you pay it, Photoshop for 10 bucks a month is a steal. Even if you paid this for 10 years, you'd still be at a total of what the software would probably cost by then if you bought a perpetual license. But you also got all updates on the way that you would have had to buy separately with perpetual. Whether or not you wanted/needed those updates is a different topic of course, but that's the math.

I'm merely pointing out that calls for professional software are a bit funny when the same people claim that Substance prices are the only thing they can afford and CC is too expensive. At least acknowledge that Substance licensing was way too good to begin with. Mari costs 2k perpetual or 59 per month with a yearly commitment and no rent-to-own option at all. Photoshop is the most dirt cheap industry standard software you can get today, and the sub includes Lightroom on top. 2-3 frigging coffees per month for that.

7
1) It makes Painter look easy to use
There's no fast mouse movements or anything too complex going on. It makes the viewer think "hey, I could easily stamp my logo onto a 3D product! That's awesome!"

THIS IS NOT A GOOD THING. We are using and want PROFESSIONAL software, not Adobe Stock 3D Asset Stamp and Post Instagram bait.

I have to point out one very strange thing going on in this thread. On the one hand we have calls like this for professional software, on the other we have probably the same people complaining that CC rental scheme is too expensive... at 10 bucks a month for Photoshop. I'd say at least pick one, because both is pretty silly.

8
Been looking at 3DCoat and Z-Brush. They look interesting but come with a higher pricetag. Especially Z-Brush. Forget about Mari. 2000$?? get outta here.


ZBrush may cost a little more but once you buy its yours for life with upgrades for life. I bought my copy of ZBrush in 2007. Its the same license, more than 10 years of updates, not a penny more was asked of me. But you know what, because they didn't push me to buy or pay for upgrades or do anything underhanded I bought more licenses for my home computer and my work computer, and converted a few coworkers into liking and using ZBrush.

Pixologic is a company that has done everything right in terms of customer focus and customer priority. Other companies should take a good hard look at Pixologic and do what they did. Thats how you become a stable long term and loved company.



3D Coat has a serious problem that should send every artist screaming in the opposite direction. They've terminated and revoke licenses on the personal opinion of the owners that the artists work was obscene (like creating a nude sculpture,  a nude human form, excessive gore, or that felt it belittled or demeaned their religion) without refund.

See their own personal statement here:

https://3dcoat.com/about-us/our-voice/

I personally would never financially support a company that will actively take their personal beliefs into action with how they treat customers and their own personal works of art.

Guys and girls,
I asked Andrew, CEO of Pilgway about this, here is what he says:
"Even if I am Christian, I am for freedom and generally against any censoring and limitations. Many years ago we removed any limitations from using the software. You may tell it to peoples on forums. We will never judge or limit artists. And if something is written in our voice - it is just opinion, nothing more. I am completely for freedom of creativity. We don't judge artists and we expect they will not judge our views."

I think this is fair enough.

Yeah. It still rubs me the wrong way to be honest, but compared to selling out to Adobe? A few religious words and bible citations on a web site, however misguided that may seem to me and others, is still the lesser of two evils in the grand scheme of things. Who knows, maybe those religious beliefs would even have prevented such a thing to happen.

9
Thanks Wes. You guys are so very optimistic, I hope it all works out for you and is not just a result of a dose of nativity and the negative aspects of capitalism today. Growing at any cost. Growing fast, too fast. We needed to grow you said, I ask why? Why was all the tremendous successes you had not enough? You guys grew to 150 employees? That's pretty insane already. How much more do you need? All the success you already had, not enough. You need more. We need to join a huge corporation that can give us more resources. Who cares if we break our necks on the way.

I don't understand the mentality of it all. You guys did your own thing with such success. But there you go, it's done now. Let's hope Adobe really treats as well as you're all hoping. Even in case stuff doesn't quite go as planned and shareholders are not so fond anymore of what you're all doing. Even when it turns out that Sébastien doesn't get along that well with the leadership in the long run, which sadly happens all too often.

10
I read Sébastien's blog post and am bewildered about the Peter Jackson moment. Somehow, in his perception, going from CEO of Allegorithmic to Vice President 3D & Immersive at Adobe is akin to Jackson going from wacky horror movies to the legandary Lord of the Rings. This is pretty close to delusional, IMO. How can a person behind a software that has already reached status of industry standard think in such a way? Is he really of the opinion that his company was just a wacky little thing in France that nobody really cared about? That working at Adobe would be insurmountably better? Boy, I sure hope he's not gonna wake up one day in coming years and realize how terribly naive he's been about what Adobe wants and generally working for a big corporation like that.

I'd compare this more to going from LOTR to The Hobbit, the latter being a product of corporate drama and being forced to do things in a way that seemed commercially ideal but completely lost all heart and passion along the way.

11


You can read Allegorithmic's comments in the thread on polycount, it appears to be fully amount money (when are these deals not about money?):

https://polycount.com/discussion/208172/adobe-substance



His certainty that nothing will change astounds me. Right now, their offices are not changing, no-one is leaving. That is right now...it does not mean it won't change in a few months. Adobe is now the boss. Therefore they will make the final call on things, not the Allegorithmic team and it may not be what the Allegorithmic team wants.

Modern history is littered with examples of major changes after takeovers. Oh they may promise right now to support the Allegorithmic team's vision, from software to customer support, to not change a thing...but give it some months, even a year or two and the changes will most likely come. None of the team's positions can be assured. They never are in a takeover. And how many times have you heard of company heads of the company bought out resigning or being 'pushed out' shortly after the takeover?? Why does Seb or any of the team assume this won't happen with Adobe? (Not saying it definately will, but you can't be sure it won't! Past experiences of other companies shows this is generally what happens.)

Not to mention, Adobe has probably gotten really good over the years at this take over thing. Sounds like they did just the right thing, been on the board for 2 years? Hit all the right notes? Been all supportive? Sounds like a pretty classic, careful and slow infiltration of a competitor. And a competitor they were, with a software that has partially replaced Photoshop for 3D texturing.

12
The team at Quixel must be cracking open the champagne right about now...... It's like finding out that Mike Tyson has been paralysed and will fight you in a wheelchair, 5 minutes before you're due to go 12 rounds.

That's hilarious you think Quixel is a better alternative since it literally requires Photoshop to even boot up. (you know, ADOBE photoshop?)

I'm referring to Megascans/Mixer. I wouldn't wipe my arse with Quixel Suite DDO, and I've been using Sub Painter since beta and Substances since they were practically unknown so you don't have to convince me of what's at stake here, mate.

What I'm getting at is that this opens the door for Quixel to get their shit together and build a brand new version of DDO that is entirely free from PS. Quixel Suite 3.0 is in production. Who knows what they will create?

Let's hope they will not create ANYTHING of value or else they will be bought be Adobe as well.

13
Not a single developer wants to leave right now. ;)

Yup, let's talk again in 5 years. I've been through one of these episodes of a software company being bought. After a few years, all the original devs were gone. Slowly it became clear that the two companies didn't fit together at all despite them having been in almost the same line of work. Not to mention, in case of Adobe there will be a hefty price to pay in terms of customer perception, which will slowly eat away at every single employee.

14
All the team members and all the offices are staying as is, nobody leaves, all the products are stll being developed the same way and by the same people.
This is not about money per say (hard to sell I know :) ) but about having the resources to build the greatest tools we can.

Are you telling me you guys became an Adobe company without a hefty sum of money involved at all? Yeah right.

Why was Adobe interested, so they could better use all the resources that they had no other use for? Yeah I'm sure they do not want to profit at all. Sorry, this is either incredibly naive or just sugar coating. You didn't need more resources, you managed to create a software that has become an industry standard all without resources of Autodesk or Adobe.

15
Everything will change. Always the same empty words after a sell out. Team will remain, licenses will remain, nothing will change. All nonesense, let's talk again in 5 years.

Pages: [1] 2