digg

Join DiggAbout

The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.

See the original image at telegraph.co.uk —

When pictures paint a thousand words

telegraph.co.uk — Adobe's decision to release a free version of its flagship Photoshop software is a calculated risk that has paid off, says Claudine Beaumont

show profanity settings
expand all
  • thealliedhacker, on 04/04/2008, -4/+7Oh, ok, I see what they did there. They want to make it run online so they can justify stealing images while they are on thier servers.

    Also, this image was altered using Adobe® Photoshop® Software®. I can tell because of the pixels, and because I've seen quite a few shops in my time.
    /lurk moar
    • NathanielJ, on 04/04/2008, -2/+5Oh no! You found their evil master plan of stealing your vacation slideshow!
      • austin63, on 04/04/2008, -2/+3Or just using your vacation slideshow in the next Adobe add. Dont like it? Tough *****! You used their "free" tool.
  • esc27, on 04/04/2008, -0/+25From what I understand, Photoshop Express is Photoshop in name only and really is little more than an online photo touch-up tool.
    • jhuebel, on 04/04/2008, -0/+4Which is all that most people need. But Adobe gets brand recognition for when an aspiring photographer moves into the big leagues.
  • DevilDriver, on 04/04/2008, -7/+1Cool, now everyone that doesn't steal Photoshop can just go use it for free online.
  • jferrari, on 04/04/2008, -2/+6Why don't they mention Aviary or Splashup? They are more 'Photoshop Express' than any of those.
    • cawpin, on 04/04/2008, -5/+1What? Do you read, or even think about, what you write? Your second sentence makes no logical sense.
    • oldhick, on 04/04/2008, -0/+1I'm guessing its because the story was about Adobe... Just a guess though. I came up with that idea by reading the article.
    • jferrari, on 04/04/2008, -0/+1Well, if you do read the articel they mention Picasa, Shutterfly etc.. just being an article about an online express replacement they could have mentioned a few sites that are viable replacements.
  • davincid, on 04/04/2008, -1/+5lol - ...edit out unsightly blemishes, such a spots, coffee stains on a child's bib,
    • amirman, on 04/04/2008, -0/+3my kid drinks coffee all the time. also i'm a serial killer.
  • NotReally91, on 04/04/2008, -1/+7New service: MySpace Music, will allow users to buy songs and albums? Interesting caption for the picture...
  • Shambla, on 04/04/2008, -1/+11Yeah, but they totally gimped the free version.
    (...hopefully someone will have seen what I have done here)
    • ahoyhoy, on 04/04/2008, -0/+2Maybe this will lead to an online-GIMP applet that costs $15 a month.
    • rayraym0fucka, on 04/04/2008, -2/+1Nope, no idea what you're talking about ;)
    • pilobilus, on 04/04/2008, -2/+2Nyuk nyuk nyuk. Been using the GIMP for years and at present I make my living with it. Ain't nothing wrong with it - and version 2.4 finally includes CMYK and color profile support. This only leaves the (bogus) bits per channel argument for why "the GIMP can not compare to Photoshop". As a matter of fact, they both work fine - and for the < 1% of real world users who need more color depth than a monitor can render, Ciniepaint a.k.a. the Film GIMP stands ready to serve... What's good enough for Pixar and DreamWorks is good enough for me. :o)
      • directrix13, on 04/04/2008, -1/+2I love GIMP and all, but >8bit color depth is not the only thing holding it back. It needs effect layers, a much improved text layout engine, and more vector graphics options. I really wish that Inkscape and GIMP could find a way to interoperate (like a vector object in GIMP managed by inkscape).
    • SmellyGeekBoy, on 04/04/2008, -1/+2Dugg up as a vote of confidence for The GIMP. If only the Mac version ran a bit smoother...
  • triskele, on 04/04/2008, -1/+2Comparing Photoshop Express and Photoshop is like comparing Outlook Express and Outlook. Not even close.
  • pilobilus, on 04/04/2008, -0/+5Does not resemble Photoshop much IMO. If you want/need a real image editor for free, get the GIMP, it does everything Photoshop does, IF you invest the same kind of time learning how it works. (Let the FUD-fed fanboy flame fest begin...)
  • chanop, on 04/04/2008, -1/+7Gimp is free, k,thnx
  • Frecklefoot, on 04/04/2008, -0/+6FTA: "Adobe has a 'worldwide, royalty-free, non-exclusive, perpetual, [and] irrevocable' right to use any photos you post on the site from here to eternity, regardless of whether or not you delete your profile."

    Scary!
    • SkippyDoorknob, on 04/04/2008, -0/+1They've been made aware of people's concerns about that in the EULA and are looking to revise it. There was a story about it the other day.
  • cababika799, on 04/04/2008, -0/+2It's been rightly suggested that if Adobe were to cut the price of Photoshop, the sheer increase in the volume of copies sold would far out-weigh the margin of profit they receive on selling fewer, yet more expensive, copies.
    Lets face it, when your product name is used to describe a whole genre of action (shopped), you know you've made it big!
  • brwright, on 04/04/2008, -1/+21Photoshop CS3 was free for me...
    • RussellDovey, on 04/04/2008, -0/+2Yarr! Ye scurvy dog, deprivin' legitimate corporations of their hard-earned booty... and not making me part of the crew! To Davy Jones with ye!
  • amirman, on 04/04/2008, -0/+1calculated risk my ass, adobe express is nothing like photoshop. it's pretty much just another red eye remover.
  • buba69, on 04/04/2008, -0/+3Photoshop Express sucks....i have tried it, it is NOT Photoshop....at all...
  • Maluka, on 04/04/2008, -1/+1Bah! The US only stuff is beginning to piss me off. There was even a caption about showing the world blah blah. Sure, from the US while the rest of us get to watch what only they are priviledged to do. I can't comment about it because I can't get it and after reading comments here, I don't want the damn thing. The US and Adobe can shove it.
  • liquisoft, on 04/04/2008, -0/+2If it had more Photoshop-like abilities (like the ability to paint, for example) it would be a much more mind-blowing offering. As it stands now, it's little more than iPhoto online.
    • sambapati87, on 04/06/2008, -0/+1It's actually LESS than iPhoto, online
  • copyland, on 04/04/2008, -0/+4is a calculated risk that has paid off?
    who writes this stuff, fifth graders?
    Correction: WAS a calculated risk that IS paying off.
  • Tiesto, on 04/04/2008, -0/+1No offence to Adobe as they make some cool stuff. But Ill carry on using my CS3 Suite. I use it maybe once a month wich to me justifies the..piracy time. If I was a pro, or a business that require CS3 then fair enough, you can afford the price. But for me, I have no guilt what so ever. And will recommend all the Adobe products at a drop of a hat. Why.. cos I use them. Legal or not.

    The company I work for buy all legit stuff and thousands go to Adobe. I have no guilt.
  • cutething, on 04/04/2008, -0/+2What a disappointment. Given the load time, the "tools" are dreadful. This is not a free version of Photoshop. This is not Photoshop. This is not a calculated "risk" at all, it's a gimmick intended to justify bloated prices and unnecessary upgrades. The only reason they've gotten away with it for so long is because of how truly useful their software is. The majority of Photoshop users have pirated copies of the program -- when Photoshop learns that they'll net a larger profit if they sell licenses for much lower prices, then they will be taking a calculated risk that pays off.
  • FishHammer, on 04/04/2008, -0/+2Am I the only one that noticed she didn't indent a single paragraph? If I could never pass a paper in school for such blasphemy she shouldn't be allowed to write articles with it. Also she started a sentence with the word "hoto".
  • pfischer, on 04/04/2008, -0/+2I find it amazing that the author of this puff piece got her picture next to the article but not her name. Additionally, there seems to be no way to send feedback to the author or the editor. The lack of information regarding your loss of rights on your photos if you use this service is to me nearly criminal. How can you write about a service like this without mentioning that you are giving your photos to Adobe for free? Not to mention that you have to click through to the second license to even find out about it.

    Think I'm kidding? Read section 8 here: https://www.photoshop.com/express/terms.html
    "you grant Adobe a worldwide, royalty-free, nonexclusive, perpetual, irrevocable, and fully sublicensable license to use, distribute, derive revenue or other remuneration from, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, publicly perform and publicly display such Content (in whole or in part) and to incorporate such Content into other Materials or works in any format or medium now known or later developed."

    How long until someone's kid is used in a major ad campaign because Adobe sold their image as part of a stock photo collection?
  • Mizzike, on 04/04/2008, -0/+1"That's bad news for iPhone users - Express would work beautifully on the iPhone because of its wonderful web browser, but, as things stand, the Apple device doesn't support Flash."

    Ah, yes... what a wonderful, magical, delightful web browser. Marvelous, really. Dude, what is that chick smoking? Doing anything with photos on the iPhone (other than rotating and zooming) is just a horrible experience because your finger is too effing big and fills up the part of the screen you're trying to edit. Have you ever tried using Sketches? It's hard enough to draw a smiley face on that thing, let alone make a complicated selection and select the right color tone you're looking for.
  • bumble55, on 04/04/2008, -0/+0Photoshop Express sucks compared to other online editing programs, like Aviary for instance
  • gemlarin, on 04/05/2008, -0/+2Lovely, now we will have a whole new batch of people considering themselves "photoshop experts".
    Irks me that I spent tens of thousands on a proper education and hundreds more on professional software only to have it devalued by some crappy free software programs.

    Me: Well, this graphic is not going to work very well in print, it's only 72dpi, where did you get it?
    Client: 72 dp what? Anyways, I pulled it off our web page.
    Me: Thats great for screen resolution, but that isn't going to work for print. I can do a photoshoot of the product and add it into the contract.
    Client: Well, I have photoshop Express. I will fix the picture and it wont cost me anything.
    Me: *bangs head on wall*
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.